The Beginning of the End? Here's Hoping.

It has been fascinating to observe the McCain campaign royally self-destruct over the course of the past couple weeks. At the end of yesterday's double wammy of bailout bill defeat and stock market plummet, the Arizona senator gave a defeated, weary two minute press statement yesterday and then trudged off stage, knowing that the end of the day couldn't come soon enough. One wonders where McCain has to go. Straight-jacketed by a lethal combination of bad decision making and risky gambles, not to mention Vice-Presidential candidate who has looked more like a liability than an asset in the same period of time.

Obama, to his credit, has run a disciplined, controlled campaign and has avoided making major gaffes. His campaign has stumbled a bit, but his major missteps happened relatively early on in the race. When compared to the controversy-a-day nature of the Clinton campaign or the dramatic and desperate risks taken by Team McCain, Obama has had few problems of his own creation. In addition, he's obviously worked hard at debate preparation, as evidenced by Friday's performance which was his strongest ever. Right now, Obama really doesn't have to do much except watch his opponent's campaign self-destruct.

What has been clear to me is that the Republican party assumed that it would be running against Hillary Clinton. The GOP had been preparing for years how to run against the former First Lady. When Obama pulled a shocking upset, McCain and the rest of his party found themselves without much of a strategy. That it took a gimmicky move like putting Sarah Palin on the ticket for the campaign to achieve its only lasting, albeit short-lived lead thus far in the general election campaign is even more evidence of bad strategy. Yes, a McCain victory was a tall order owing to the fact that President Bush's approval rating is extremely low and the electorate is thoroughly sick of Republican leadership. It might still transpire. Much can happen in a month's time.

Candidates before have overcome substantial odds and either successfully closed the gap or come back from behind to win. In 1948, Harry Truman's non-stop barnstorming and whistle-stop campaigning turned what was thought of as an almost sure defeat into a narrow victory. Truman still trailed Dewey significantly in October, but in a month's time closed the gap and overtook his Republican challenger. In 1976, Gerald Ford trailed Jimmy Carter by upwards of thirty points in the summer, but benefitted from significant Carter mistakes to narrow the race considerably. Ford even managed to shrug off a poor showing in the second debate to lose barely on Election Day.

With a little more than a month to go, anything can happen, but if Team McCain hopes to win, they're going to have to turn things around and catch a break in the process.

A Solution for Our Troubled Economy

Dollar Dollar Bill, Y'all.

You Know That I Care

Good Afternoon

Sign of the Times

Today's Howard Fineman's column underscores what many on blogs have been saying for the past several days. In brief, the dual theories of trickle-down-economics and "the business of America is business" have fallen by the wayside. To some degree, it's nice to be proven right, though it's hollow consolation considering how wrecked the economy is at the moment. Expect more government oversight and tight controls upon the private sector. Also expect constant cries of "socialism" and "communism" from the right. Times have changed and the traditional GOP talking points don't hold water anymore.

Let them vent. If they had any new ideas and weren't beholden to positions that have proven to be not just wrong, but disasterous, they might be worthy of our attention. As I reflect back upon eight years of George W. Bush I think about how many Republican ideals have been shown to be wrong---not just a little bit wrong, but totally wrong. A party supposedly governed by financial restraint swelled the federal deficit to record heights. A party loathe to provide needed regulation under the pretense of not wishing to hamstring business failed to learn from the lessons of Hoover. A party often opposed to foreign entanglements followed its leader into a misguided war for oil and aimed to establish a permanent base of operations in the Middle East. A party supposedly guided by Reagan's assertion that government's scope should be minimal grew like a cancerous growth.

These are just the first few examples that come to mind. There are many more. I knew long ago that the only way the American people would disregard the failed policy of our conservative opponents is if they dramatically self-destructed. We get to say I-told-you-so but I mostly hope this means that we'll conclusively resolve that voodoo economics and favors to big business are enemies of the state.

A Brief Anecdote

Today I was assigned to watch the kids during First Hour worship. Though I had a lesson planned out, as I fully suspected, they wanted to go play outside instead of stay indoors and listen to me.

I have to say this: I certainly didn't think I'd end up in a intense political discussion with a third grader and a fourth grader. It was a truly rewarding experience that really made me feel good about the generation coming up after my own. Interestingly enough, according to the children, this year's Presidential Election is being discussed actively and openly in schools, and even among the kids themselves. Granted, these are Quaker kids, and as such inclined to be raised in affluent, politically active families, so I might need to discount this a little. Still, this morning I was thinking to myself that I would have felt very comfortable in this kind of environment when I was in elementary school.

In other esoteria, today I was asked by a visitor to meeting as to whether I was from another country. Quite frequently people think I'm European, which secretly pleases me. If you saw my behavior in public, you'd understand why. I'm more reserved than the average American, more measured in my speech, not as demonstrative or gushy, and more meditative. Smiles are rare, but genuine. The really ironic thing about that is that I'd be far more typically American if I didn't have such tremendous social anxiety. I try to keep my features firm because that's my defense towards feeling so completely uncomfortable in a social setting.

Don't Forget To Check Out

The American Street

...where I guest blog today, as I do all Saturdays.

Saturday Song

This week's Saturday Song is dedicated in part to Blue Gal who will get the reference.

Devo were a new wave/geek rock group of Kent State University students who created a band based on a half-baked theory that humanity was de-evolving, hence DEVO. They created a whole world of bizarre characters and equally bizarre thematic elements that was as campy as it was cerebral. After subsisting as an underground sensation and darling of the college radio crowd for its first two albums, Devo achieved a degree of mainstream success with the quirky hit "Whip It". This song, "Jocko Homo" summarizes the mock-theory of Devo in a few sentences. The video features the original version of the song, which I much prefer to that which came later.

Mark Motherbaugh, the group's main songwriter later achieved success, scoring feature films and creating the soundtrack for popular childrens' television shows.

___________

EDIT I'm not quite sure why youtube is giving people fits. I myself had a hard time accessing certain videos yesterday. If you can't view this video or any of the other posted on my blog, I recommend refreshing. If that doesn't work, then you may need to wait until later and hope matters are resolved then.

This Might Have Contributed to the Obesity Epidemic

One thing is for sure. Fast food will never be presented to the consumer this way ever again.

The Debate Drinking Game

Take a drink whenever you observe any of the following events during tonight's debate.

1. Obama beginning an answer with "Well, look..."
2. McCain making an attack on Obama, but attempting to disguise it with a forced grin.
3. McCain referring to the audience as "my friends".
4. Obama saying "uh" at least ten times every sentence.

Add your own and have fun with the joke.

Debate Moments

I'm writing this post assuming the first Presidential Debate will be held tonight. Having said that, here are a few crucial moments from past Presidential debates that either boldly broke the race wide open or threw the race to the eventual winning candidate.

1976



1980



1984



1988



1992



1996



2000




2004

All Democrat Wars

The Vice-Presidential debate, so far as I know, is still to go off next week as scheduled. Here's a priceless soundbyte from the 1976 campaign, which proves that being too blunt and too partisan can backfire.

The Subtle Face Is A Loser

Regarding the Legacy of Bad Presidents, in Their Own Words

James Buchanan, 1856.

What a happy conception, then, was it for Congress to apply this simple rule, that the will of the majority shall govern, to the settlement of the question of domestic slavery in the Territories. Congress is neither "to legislate slavery into any Territory or State nor to exclude it therefrom, but to leave the people thereof perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the Constitution of the United States."

This is, happily, a matter of but little practical importance. Besides, it is a judicial question, which legitimately belongs to the Supreme Court of the United States, before whom it is now pending, and will, it is understood, be speedily and finally settled.


Warren Harding, 1920.

I don't know much about Americanism, but it's a damn good word with which to carry an election.

Herbert Hoover, 1928

One of the oldest and perhaps the noblest of human aspirations has been the abolition of poverty. By poverty I mean the grinding by undernourishment, cold and ignorance and fear of old age of those who have the will to work. We in America today are nearer to the final triumph over poverty than ever before in the history of any land. The poorhouse is vanishing from among us. We have not yet reached the goal, but given a chance to go forward with the policies of the last eight years, and [sic] we shall soon with the help of God be in sight of the day when poverty will be banished from this Nation. There is no guarantee against poverty equal to a job for every man. That is the primary purpose of the economic policies we advocate.




George W. Bush, 2003.

We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories. You remember when Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said, Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons. They're illegal. They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two. And we'll find more weapons as time goes on. But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them.

Anything Everything if You Want Thing

Greed IS Good!

Ironic, huh?

Movie Review: If....

If...was avant-garde director Lindsay Anderson's damning indictment of the British public school system. In Britain, "public" school actually connotes elite, expensive education which is both decidedly exclusive and exceedingly private. Indeed the public school is designed to teach and train the upper echelon of British society for forthcoming roles as Members of Parliament, top military leaders, and other highly visible positions of distinction with the nation itself. Anderson himself was quite familiar with this highly regimented system of boarding schools for the upper crust, as he himself spent several miserable years at college, the very same college, in fact, where most of the film is shot. His repulsion towards the brutality, inhumanity, and strict discipline of his college year stayed with him during his adult life. As such, If.... turns a negative eye towards everyone and everything associated with it: sadistic masters who punish students with both physical and emotional abuse, spiteful classmates whose goal in life seems to be to shame and humiliate their peers, a closeted homosexual reverend who advocates empty religious platitudes no one seems to take seriously, nor live up to in reality, and the ever present haughty student leaders, the whips, who dole out corporal punishment towards all those who resist. After watching nearly two hours of spleen and bile, one wonders if anything in the whole sordid mess is worth saving.

After watching If.... I myself had a similar visceral response. As I viewed the film, I remembered rather painfully what it was like to be a young adolescent male. Everything came back to me---the uniform teasing, the one boy specifically targeted by all the rest for intense bullying, the embarrassingly crude banter regarding the opposite sex and the act of fornication, the leaden drudgery of routine, and the crushing indignity which came with the realization that the supposed adults in charge were always either blissfully unaware of the abuses or totally apathetic towards what was going on under their watch. Many of the adults which comprise the faculty and staff of the school are immobilized by boredom, living lives years behind the times, little more than impotent and passionless. Thus rebellion would seem to be inevitable. So it is that a gang of three nonconformist older boys take it upon themselves to fight back. In contrast with most of the other character who make up the establishment of the public school, the rebels who openly resist these injustices are given a slightly sympathetic portrayal; yet they still appear by turns slightly naive and severely immature. This close-knit band of openly defiant crusaders were after all meant to be no older than high school age, although some of the actors were actually in their early twenties at the time of filming.

The shocking end of the film often gets the most attention. I would, however, caution viewers not to take the dramatic conclusion too literally. If.... shows us a few surrealistic sequences beforehand to prepare us, the audience, for the infamous and highly controversial last ten minutes. Anderson's cinematic aim, after all, was to assert that the system itself was fundamentally flawed and as such should be destroyed, not reformed. Still, while he at times claimed to be an anarchist bent on total destruction without showing even a hint of mercy, for all his revolutionary zeal, there were elements of the public school for which he clearly retained a fondness. The quirky history master, is one good example of this. This character, who rides a bicycle directly into the classroom and then offhandedly and glibly tosses graded essays into the air, is itself an affectionate portrayal of an actual teacher who taught the director back in his schoolboy days. However, it should also be noted that this scene is one of the few lighthearted passages in an otherwise grim feature film.

While If.... has dated slightly over the years, it was deliberately constructed in such a way as to be immune from the passage of time. No references to current events, nor any examples of the music of the late 1960s is included, elements which would have immediately put a heavy time stamp upon the film. Though the clothing styles, eyeglasses, and hairdos have dated a bit in forty years, the events themselves as presented in the picture could still occur today. Its setting, a country even to the present day justifiably proud of its esteemable tradition and still strongly inclined to disregard reform in place of the old tried-and-true methods insists no less. Still, this pronounced foolish consistency also serves as Anderson's extended metaphor for the state of the United Kingdom at the time of shooting. Ruinous economic policy had reduced the country to a shadow of its former self. Stuck in the past, Great Britain was utterly unprepared to face the challenges of the future. Britons have since described that in those times it felt as though the entire country was suffering collectively from a nervous breakdown. Anderson's radical proposal: in order to revive the nation's fortunes, the whole of it needed to be pulled down and summarily destroyed brick by brick. That remains a shockingly controversial notion even today.

Not That I Need to Worry About This with Any of You, But...

I Gotta Say This, I Hope You Don't Mind

Movie Review: Leaves From Satan's Book

D.W. Griffith's 1916 film Intolerance, though a box office disappointment, did much to inspire many up-and-coming filmmakers across the world. New and undiscovered talent got a firsthand view of precisely what the discipline was capable of displaying visually and thematically to the audience. Danish director Carl Theodore Dreyer found himself among the ranks of the awe-struck, seeing for himself the impressive impact of the multitude of technical innovations and expansive high production values used in the film. Accordingly, Dreyer's attempt to follow in the master's footsteps, the 1919 film Leaves from Satan's Book, owes much to American cinema and Griffith's unique penchant for historical reenactment and sweeping epic. The film is not without some flaws---Dreyer had to work within the financial limitations of the Scandinavian film industry and as such didn't have all the tools allotted to him that a comparable American director would have had at his disposal. Still, as rendered Leaves from Satan's Book is a competent, somewhat restrained work which, in spite of its shortcomings, still manages to be a bit of a minor gem.

Leaves from Satan's Book does suffer a bit from its creator's relative inexperience behind the lens and his well-meaning, but occasionally heavy-handed commentary. The picture is guilty of placing the sole burden of blame in very complex past events squarely on the shoulders of one or two supremely evil offenders, who if we would believe the damning intertitles, were acting directly in accordance with the wishes of Satan himself. A study of the historical record finds that many people were complicit in the regrettably extremely, fanatical travesties of the French Revolution and the Spanish Inquisition, to name but two. Griffith, too, had a tendency to embellish historical fact and resort to jingoistic hyperbole in his films when veracity would have been better served. A contemporary audience might find it interesting to ponder how little has changed over the years; films have often been known to moralize and preach to the crowds in a ham-fisted manner, much to the chagrin of reviewers and audience members alike. So in observing early cinema one can easily see that this is a phenomenon that didn't exactly start yesterday.

Some of the flaws in Leaves from Satan's Book should not be lain at the feet of its director. While it is true that at the end of the 1910's many advances in camera work and shot selection had been incorporated into the cinematic canon, it should also be noted that silent cinema still had a ways to go before it reached its zenith. Films of the mid-silent era, though more advanced and watchable than those of the early days, still at times appear deeply primitive to the naked eye when compared with modern cinema, requiring viewers to take on a healthy dose of patience. Leaves from Satan's Book, to its credit, does try to push past its weakness by utilizing a creative plot, incorporating a series of short vignettes and intensely wrought character studies all under the umbrella of aiming to explore the role of evil in the daily lives of significant persons over time. Dryer had yet to learn the essential rules of non-sound film---namely, one simply cannot portray life on celluloid exactly how it exists in reality. Rather than fighting against these limitations, work within the confines of pre-synchronized sound and accomplish cinematically something one could never achieve if sound was an option. In working within these parameters instead of against them, an enthralling alternate reality is created.

Eventually Dreyer would figure this out for himself, building upon on the success of this film in reaching his directorial apex eight years later in The Passion of Joan of Arc. That picture is still one of the most beautifully filmed movies ever created, so much so that some film historians consider it the best silent film ever created. Dreyer accomplished this substantial feat through the frequent use of distinct, singularly unique camera shots which presented the narrative of the work almost exclusively in a series of extreme facial closeups. Much of these highlight the torment and torture of the French patron saint herself, revealing with great emotional depth the desperation of the captured Joan.

That film was, however, still some time to come.