The Ally McBeal Presidency

For those who may recall, the television sitcom "Ally McBeal" portrayed Calista Flockhart as a comic/ ironic young lawyer at the Boston law firm of Cage, Fish, and Associates, which also employed characters portrayed by Lucy Liu and Robert Downey Jr.

Now if an attorney were to meet Calista Flockhart today, perhaps at a Los Angeles area Aston Martin dealer, he might at first think he has finally found an attractive, well dressed, successful attorney with whom he can discuss the implications of the Supreme Court's MedImmune v Genentech decision. He would be astonished to learn that she in fact has no law degree or formal legal training of any sort. Further, she in fact has no material knowledge of, or interest in the practice of law. Strange, you might think- on the show she appeared to be a practicing attorney. But this is the nature of a fictional character- it doesn't really exist, except in a work of fiction as portrayed by an actress or actor functioning under the instruction of a director with a supporting cast and crew, writers and a script.

The Obama presidency stands apart from any other presidency in recent history (and perhaps in the entire history of the country) in that the Barack Obama elected to serve as President is in fact the first fictional character elected President. Just as Calista Flockhart is not really Ally McBeal, the character elected President is not really Barack Obama but simply a fictional character portrayed by him. Let's compare:

Ally McBeal (as portrayed by Calista Flockhart)
---
1. Attorney
2. Employed by Cage, Fish, and Associates
3. Resident of Boston, MA

Actual Calista Flockhart
---
1. Actress
2. Employed by David E. Kelley and FOX network
3. Resident of Los Angeles

Likewise, we can compare the "Barack Obama character", as seen on television, with the actual person:

Barack Obama President Character
---
1. Patriotic post-partisan post-racial centrist
2. Genius intellectual
3. Cosmopolitan
4. Ciceronian Orator
5. Principled leader

Actual Barack Obama
---
1. Leninist ideologue class and race warrior- recall his friendships with domestic terrorist William Ayers and racist demagogue Reverend Wright.
2. Buffoonish imbecile- witness his bumbling ineptitude in addressing the countries critical economic issues
3. Xenophobe- his DVD box set gift to the visiting head of state of our staunchest ally speaks volumes
4. Experienced tele-prompter reader- even American Idol contestants must learn the words of the songs written for them
5. Management trainee- witness his hapless attempts to fill his cabinet

Appropriately, Barack Obama in fact has an IMDB page listing his various roles and theatrical appearances. Unfortunately, just as Calista Flockhart would have little chance of beating an experienced litigator in the courtroom, the actual Barack Obama can only play the character of a great statesman and leader. In retrospect, a better casting agency might have selected Martin Sheen, Dennis Haysbert, or Harrison Ford to lead the country in these difficult times given their success in portraying excellent Presidents on screen. May the next President be an actual one.

Getting it right- Which NYC society hieress should fill the NY senate seat?

With the departure of Hillary Clinton from the US Senate, it was immediately obvious to all that the logical candidate to replace her would be someone with no relevant experience or past demonstrated interest in the position, but with a number of extremely important characteristics:
- Famous
- Heiress of a vast fortune created by a very successful and famous ancestor
- Popular fixture on the NYC social scene

Unfortunately after that, things went off the tracks and Caroline Kennedy was inadvertently assumed to be the proper choice. But what about Paris Hilton? She satisfies all of the above criteria also, and unlike other rich heiress socialites she leveraged her inheritance to become a model, actress, author, musician, tv star, and fashion designer creating a burgeoning empire. Clearly she is the superior entrepreneur and business person with a natural drive to create value in the marketplace. In addition, her involvement in the last presidential campaign demonstrates an interest in national politics.

Isn't this what our failing economy needs, rather than an otherwise equivalent candidate who instead channeled her fame/ wealth/ celebrity into mundane society endeavors such as serving on non-profit boards?

Movie Review Review- NY Times on "Gran Torino"

The NY Times has a review of Clint Eastwood's new movie "Gran Torino".
I am not particularly interested in whether the movie is good or not, but rather the nature of the review by MANOHLA DARGIS. It is entitled "Hope for a Racist, and Maybe a Country." The author, and the media in general, are obsessed with inserting race into every possible discussion. Is racism the central theme of this movie? Was the importance of recycling the central theme of Wall-E?

Twice in the last decade, just as the holiday movie season has begun to sag under the weight of its own bloat, full of noise and nonsense signifying nothing, Clint Eastwood has slipped another film into theaters and shown everyone how it’s done. This year’s model is “Gran Torino,” a sleek, muscle car of a movie Made in the U.S.A., in that industrial graveyard called Detroit. I’m not sure how he does it, but I don’t want him to stop. Not because every film is great — though, damn, many are — but because even the misfires show an urgent engagement with the tougher, messier, bigger questions of American life.

It doesn't seem like there is any shortage of engagement with the "tougher, messier, bigger questions" if that means racism when ESPN segments routinely focus on whether a coach has been hired or fired because of his race, or whether investigation (or lack thereof) into a player's use of performance enhancing drugs is due to his race. There seems to be plenty of engagement, and plenty of certainty, that race is the key driver in practically every event from the mundane (voting for a Presidential candidate) to the extraordinary (running for President).

Few Americans make movies about this country anymore... Hollywood made movies for export then, of course, but part of what it exported was an idea of America as a democratic ideal, an idea of greatness which, however blinkered and false and occasionally freighted with pessimism, was persuasive simply because Gene Kelly and John Wayne were persuasive.

It has often been said that the movie industry is happy to make movies about America provided that they are extremely critical of our country and culture. For example, there were plenty of anti-war movies made over the last several years, though few were seen by an audience. Its clear enough that "Few Americans make good movies about this country, and few depict any important aspect of the country in a positive manner. Its nice to see that the author is ready to retroactively eliminate those good films made in a past era that failed to meet the new standards for political correctness. If "On the Waterfront" were made today, it would have to be about a good union boss fighting a greedy corporation. While the anti-American team has been diligently working to hide or prevent present and future American greatness, it is expanding its efforts to hide or eliminate past greatness lest people find inspiration in these "blinkered and false" past works.

While it’s easy to understand why the last eight years (or the last 50) have made it difficult to sell that idea to the world or even the country, it’s dispiriting that so many movies are disconnected from everyday experience, from economic worries to race.

Its more difficult to understand why people still read the New York Times, but its easy to understanding why its difficult to sell it. It will be increasingly difficult to sell ad space in it. I doubt if there's a need for more movies connected to "everyday experience, from economic worries to race."

Ms. Kael also famously branded Don Siegel’s “Dirty Harry” as “deeply immoral,” even fascistic, but the film became a classic because of its ambiguous engagement with American violence and masculinity. Mr. Eastwood and a .44 Magnum did their bit too.

As above, Wall-E was not a call for increased recycling and most people probably didn't think Dirty Harry was "deeply fascistic" or distinguished by its "ambiguous engagement with American violence and masculinity". Most fans would say Dirty Harry resonated because:
a) Dirty Harry understood that there was a war going on between society and criminals, and he used his ability to find and kill the criminals and win the war
b) Dirty Harry put his mission first and had utter disdain for the bureaucratic red tape and politics which often muddle purpose and ensure failure in all manner of everyday experience (e.g. going to work, visiting the doctor, etc).

“It was made by an industry that now barely makes cars, in a city that hardly works, in a country that too often has felt recently as if it can’t do anything right anymore except, every so often, make a movie like this one.”

I'm pretty sure American's are achieving bigger things than making this movie. But if you don't think so, you should write for the NY Times.

Failure by Design 2

Prior to 2008 I have never donated to a political campaign before and never planned to as I do not support the scurrilous aspirations of power hungry scumbags.

The politicians, perhaps recognizing that many potential donors are likewise withholding funds, have embarked on a strategy of making such a colossal disaster of things (e.g. FNMA, 401ks/ pension funds, the economy, et al) that one cannot sit by any longer. Each new failure further increases their power, bringing huge new sections of the economy under their control and making every citizen even more beholden to them. Each new failure brings both new reasons to fund a politician to fix the problem, or to curry favor from a politician.

Therefore I donated a lot of money to several candidates this year in hopes of slowing their collective drive to destroy the country. I have no expectations that these candidates will actually create value, only that they may retard each others' progress in their collective quest to destroy the country.

Tonight I learned that one investment may pay off, a donation to Saxby Chambliss to support him in his run-off election today made in hopes of ensuring some small measure of gridlock in congress.

With failure now the goal among the governing class, its heads they win and tails we all lose.

The Conscience of a Conservative

In light of the deep troubles afflicting our country, including the macroeconomic downturn and the war with the Islamofascists, citizens are in need of a clear and comprehensive philosophy for understanding the problems facing us and how they might best be resolved. Desperate groping for unspecified and random "Hope and Change", while perhaps understandable, will lead to incoherent actions and bad results.

With the defeat of McCain and various Republican candidates for Congress, it appears clear that the Republican party has not presented a superior alternative to the voters. Fortunately one exists, and it is available to all in a succinct, easy to read, and inexpensive book.

Of course I am speaking of Barry Goldwater's book "The Conscience of a Conservative." Goldwater provides a simple, clear, and timeless foundation for Conservative philosophy:
- The basis is Liberty for the individual

- Conservative philosophy is comprehensive and addresses spiritual and moral matters and is not limited to economic matters

- The philosophy places the individual at the forefront:

"Only a philosophy that takes into account the essential differences between men, and, accordingly, makes provision for developing the different potentialities of each man can claim to be in accord with Nature"

- Government power must be diligently restricted to preserve Liberty.

"Throughout history, government has proved to be the chief instrument for thwarting man's liberty"

The principal means for restricting government power is strict adherence to the Constitution's provisions dictating the responsibilities delegated to the Federal government

- Failure to achieve this historically has resulted in the Federal government's grave infringement on the liberty of individuals. This is damaging to both the spirit and economic welfare of each individual and must be rolled back.

- Some may say that the book's final chapter, "The Soviet Menace", is an archaeological relic which obviously has no relevance today given the demise of the USSR. However, it in fact remains as relevant as ever in the face of today's Islamofacist threat as it appears we are repeating some of the same mistakes. For example:

"Our enemies have understood the nature of the conflict and we have not. They are determined to win the conflict, and we are not."

Goldwater goes on to say that we must recognize that we are in a war and devise a strategy focused on winning. Goldwater also points out various ideological aspects of the USSR's strategy which are quite similar to those employed now by the Islamofascists, and discusses our proper response to them.

This concise book is a must read for those interested in understanding the basics of Conservative thought and should be viewed as an instruction manual for Republican party leadership.

The Perfect Messenger?

With the terrorist attacks in Mumbai and the Christmas season upon us, it seems like a good time for a message of peace and tolerance. Of course, when delivering such a message, it is important to deliver it clearly and with sensitivity to the audience to ensure proper comprehension and persuasiveness.

On a visit today to the Smithsonian's Stephen Udvar-Hazy Air and Space museum in Chantilly, Virginia we saw one of the great messengers from the past- the Enola Gay, which persuaded the phenomenally evil imperial Japan to re-consider the importance of respect for other cultures.

After an apparently painstaking restoration, the plane appears as ready to deliver another message of peace and tolerance today, perhaps this time to various addresses in Waziristan which are said to be difficult to reach by Lobster-gram. Hopefully the message will be dispatched soon to ensure timely arrival for the holidays and a Happy New Year.

Wall Street Journal's Annual Thanksgiving Columns

Every year I read these 2 columns which the WSJ always reprints:

The Desolate Wilderness

Here beginneth the chronicle of those memorable circumstances of the year 1620, as recorded by Nathaniel Morton, keeper of the records of Plymouth Colony, based on the account of William Bradford, sometime governor thereof:

So they left that goodly and pleasant city of Leyden, which had been their resting-place for above eleven years, but they knew that they were pilgrims and strangers here below, and looked not much on these things, but lifted up their eyes to Heaven, their dearest country, where God hath prepared for them a city (Heb. XI, 16), and therein quieted their spirits.

Continue reading


And the Fair Land

Any one whose labors take him into the far reaches of the country, as ours lately have done, is bound to mark how the years have made the land grow fruitful.

This is indeed a big country, a rich country, in a way no array of figures can measure and so in a way past belief of those who have not seen it. Even those who journey through its Northeastern complex, into the Southern lands, across the central plains and to its Western slopes can only glimpse a measure of the bounty of America.

Continue Reading