Patrick Swayze died today at age 57. So did Jody Powell who had been one of the key men behind Jimmy Carter's rise to the presidency in 1976. He was 65. They were, in a sense, my contemporaries. I read a story last week about Mitzi Gaynor. There's a name I haven't heard in decades. She was the star of Rodgers & Hammerstein's movie musical South Pacific (which I've never seen) and is returning to Kauai in October to take part in the Garden Isle's celebration of the film's 50th anniversary.
I mention these few names to remind myself about a story I've been planning to write about people dying. Sometimes it will be people that I thought had died long ago. There's Doris Day, 87, long out of the limelight who has changed her name to Clara Kappelhoff and turned her back on Hollywood to live a reclusive lifestyle in rural California.
This has got me thinking more seriously about writing this story.
Monday, September 14, 2009
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Building 7--Controlled demolition
This is from KMPH Fox 26 in Fresno Ca. Building 7 was brought down in a controlled demolition. If you don't believe this, what is your alternative explanation, bearing in mind that this opinion is of 700 American architects and engineers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO2yT0uBQbM&feature=player_embedded
See the detailed story plus another video at Salem-News.com
http://www.salem-news.com/articles/september102009/911_revisited_as_9-10-09.php
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO2yT0uBQbM&feature=player_embedded
See the detailed story plus another video at Salem-News.com
http://www.salem-news.com/articles/september102009/911_revisited_as_9-10-09.php
More Charlie Sheen
The MSM are not picking up Sheen, at all. Until the NYT notices it, it really doesn't exist. The LA Times mentioned it and lots of little places. Some are openly critical and saying things like Sheen has gone "cuckoo bananas". Meghan McCain (John's daughter) openly dismisses Sheen by saying he is a man who has had sex with prostitutes, so why should anyone take his politics seriously? Way to go, Meghan. You certainly took care of that controversy.
I think it was a mistake to produce the imagined interview with Obama. Some people are referring to it like it really happened, not having noticed the disclaimer at the bottom.
There are a lot of big names who agree with Sheen, but we haven't heard from one of them. I'm hoping that they're letting Sheen carry the ball for the first few days, then others will step up to the plate. If they don't, the issue is going to die quickly.
I think it was a mistake to produce the imagined interview with Obama. Some people are referring to it like it really happened, not having noticed the disclaimer at the bottom.
There are a lot of big names who agree with Sheen, but we haven't heard from one of them. I'm hoping that they're letting Sheen carry the ball for the first few days, then others will step up to the plate. If they don't, the issue is going to die quickly.
Friday, September 11, 2009
Charlie Sheen on 9/11
I read it in my own Salem-News last evening. "Charlie Sheen EXTREMELY POWERFUL Video Address To Obama, Demands Transparency, Truth On 911" (http://www.salem-news.com/articles/september102009/sheen_9-10-09.php)
It blows me away and, a word I have never consciously used--I feel discombobalated.
Is this the beginning of the Second American Revolution? I certainly hope so.
So far, I haven't seen any significant mention in the MSM but if this story takes off, it's going to completely unhinge American society.
The next 24-48 hours is, I think, going to tell the tale.
It blows me away and, a word I have never consciously used--I feel discombobalated.
Is this the beginning of the Second American Revolution? I certainly hope so.
So far, I haven't seen any significant mention in the MSM but if this story takes off, it's going to completely unhinge American society.
The next 24-48 hours is, I think, going to tell the tale.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
All my stories on SN
Here's a link to all the stories I've published on SN http://gravityshadow.com/SN%20stories.htm It is continually updated so reflects all stories after Sept 10, 2009
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Maybe democracy can't be fixed
In my article of September 1, "Fixing Democracy" (http://www.salem-news.com/articles/september012009/fixing_democracy_9-2-09.php) I overlooked one glaring point: Texas. That is one state that is surely sui generis. They would almost never accept any kind of cooperation from anyone else. Can you imagine Texans accepting legislators that had been elected by the people of Oregon? Here in Canada it would be the same: Alberta.
Winston Churchill said that democracy is the worst political system--except for all the others. That's the kind of thinking that short circuits progress. If such a great politician were to believe that, then there certainly would not be anything better than democracy.
We've got to think outside the box (Gad, I hate cliches like that), but here's a couple of ideas.
Let all the legislators be picked at random from the voter's lists and be appointed to two year terms. They would pick leaders among themselves.
Or, some form of benevolent dictatorship. Sounds like an oxymoron but find some random way for a person to be given virtually absolute power short of the power to execute or imprison people for a period of five to ten years.
Here's a direction to consider: One of the big problems of politics is corruption, usually financial. Make politicians incorruptible. Politicians could only have fixed terms of five to ten years at generous recompense of say a million dollars a year--tax free. At the end of their term the voters could vote on their performance. If they are voted to have done a good job, let them retire with a lump sum of, say ten million dollars and a generous annual pension--all of it tax free. Two advantages to this--it would make it difficult to bribe such politicans; and if they knew they had a fat retirement package in the future, they would be motivated to do well.
The downside to this, of course, is the same as under the current system: they would have to please the same rabble. As P. J. O'Rourke has commented: “No drug, not even alcohol, causes the fundamental ills of society. If we’re looking for the sources of our troubles, we shouldn’t test people for drugs, we should test them for stupidity, ignorance, greed and love of power.”
But it's hard to imagine anyone making fundamental changes to their existing political systems. The American people, for example, have been deluded into believing that they have a system set up by the most magical of beings, the Founding Fathers, and that to tamper with the system is to somehow invite disaster. Wait...the American people already have disaster!
As the system is set up now, greed rules and no one thinks about the ecological and financial buden they are passing on to their children and grandchildren. But as Thomas Homer-Dixon, Director, University of Toronto Trudeau Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, poses it:
“What do we consider to be the good life? What kind of world do we want for our children? We’re not having that conversation.”
Winston Churchill said that democracy is the worst political system--except for all the others. That's the kind of thinking that short circuits progress. If such a great politician were to believe that, then there certainly would not be anything better than democracy.
We've got to think outside the box (Gad, I hate cliches like that), but here's a couple of ideas.
Let all the legislators be picked at random from the voter's lists and be appointed to two year terms. They would pick leaders among themselves.
Or, some form of benevolent dictatorship. Sounds like an oxymoron but find some random way for a person to be given virtually absolute power short of the power to execute or imprison people for a period of five to ten years.
Here's a direction to consider: One of the big problems of politics is corruption, usually financial. Make politicians incorruptible. Politicians could only have fixed terms of five to ten years at generous recompense of say a million dollars a year--tax free. At the end of their term the voters could vote on their performance. If they are voted to have done a good job, let them retire with a lump sum of, say ten million dollars and a generous annual pension--all of it tax free. Two advantages to this--it would make it difficult to bribe such politicans; and if they knew they had a fat retirement package in the future, they would be motivated to do well.
The downside to this, of course, is the same as under the current system: they would have to please the same rabble. As P. J. O'Rourke has commented: “No drug, not even alcohol, causes the fundamental ills of society. If we’re looking for the sources of our troubles, we shouldn’t test people for drugs, we should test them for stupidity, ignorance, greed and love of power.”
But it's hard to imagine anyone making fundamental changes to their existing political systems. The American people, for example, have been deluded into believing that they have a system set up by the most magical of beings, the Founding Fathers, and that to tamper with the system is to somehow invite disaster. Wait...the American people already have disaster!
As the system is set up now, greed rules and no one thinks about the ecological and financial buden they are passing on to their children and grandchildren. But as Thomas Homer-Dixon, Director, University of Toronto Trudeau Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, poses it:
“What do we consider to be the good life? What kind of world do we want for our children? We’re not having that conversation.”
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
All of life's riddles are answered in the movies
In the 1991 movie "Grand Canyon" Steve Martin plays a movie producer whose best friend is immigration lawyer Kevin Kline. At one point he says to Kline: "You know what your problem is? You haven't seen enough movies. All of life's riddles are answered in the movies." I think there is substantial truth in that saying. Seventy five years ago, people read more. And not just magazines and newspapers. They read more books. In the nonfiction field, each book was a story that could teach something to the reader by showing them another world.
Even today, with the Second Great Depression underway, I think it would be rare to find a person who has read John Steinbeck's 1939 classic Grapes of Wrath. Set during the First Great Depression, the book focuses on a poor family of sharecroppers, the Joads, driven from their home by drought, economic hardship, and changes in the agriculture industry. Other than some details, there are millions of Joads across America today.
Movies, today, are the equivalent of books of 75 years ago.
Michael Moore's latest movie, "Capitalism: A love story" hasn't been released yet but for those of us who are socially aware, there won't be anything new in it. It is my hope that it will provide a much needed spark of insight in the psyches of many Americans who still believe that capitalism is basically okay, just going through a bit of a "rough patch".
Then, there's Oliver Stone's 1987 movie "Wall Street" starring Michael Douglas as Gordon Gekko, the king of greed. Shooting is now under way for this unexpected sequel, "Wall Street 2". Read about it here http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/08/movies/08stone.html?pagewanted=1.
Even today, with the Second Great Depression underway, I think it would be rare to find a person who has read John Steinbeck's 1939 classic Grapes of Wrath. Set during the First Great Depression, the book focuses on a poor family of sharecroppers, the Joads, driven from their home by drought, economic hardship, and changes in the agriculture industry. Other than some details, there are millions of Joads across America today.
Movies, today, are the equivalent of books of 75 years ago.
Michael Moore's latest movie, "Capitalism: A love story" hasn't been released yet but for those of us who are socially aware, there won't be anything new in it. It is my hope that it will provide a much needed spark of insight in the psyches of many Americans who still believe that capitalism is basically okay, just going through a bit of a "rough patch".
Then, there's Oliver Stone's 1987 movie "Wall Street" starring Michael Douglas as Gordon Gekko, the king of greed. Shooting is now under way for this unexpected sequel, "Wall Street 2". Read about it here http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/08/movies/08stone.html?pagewanted=1.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
