On Midterms and Iraq

Yeah, it's been a while...

Well, we got what we asked for. The Dems have taken over the House and the Senate. Pelosi's ready to call for troop withdrawal and investigate Halliburton. Hillary stocks her war chest; Barak continues with the Hamlet routine (to run or not to run). Rummy's searching the help want-ads (not for long, I assume) and one can only hope that someone's taken Foley's cell phone away. But what do we really have?

IRAQ

Can we simply pull a Korea and declare victory and walk away? Obviously, something has to change. The hawks claim that if we withdraw now, the power vacuum will create another terrorist breeding ground (a.k.a. Afghanistan) and Al Quieda (sic.) stronghold. Well, at what point do we stay involved in what has clearly become a civil war? How long can we wait for the Iraqi security forces to step up and take control?

The Iraqi government is like the 35 year-old guy you know who still lives in his parents basement. Everyone wants to know why he won't leave. The answer is simple: he doesn't have to! He's got a roof over his head, a live in cook and maid and cheap rent. He won't leave until he's forced to take action. Good ole Mom has to stop cooking, cleaning and hike up the rent. Only then will the human sponge abandon his basement lair. Until we stop doing the dirty work in Iraq, the Iraqis will never step up and take charge. Why should they? Let the Americans spend all the money on the hardware and supplies and take on the dangerous missions. Dumb like a fox, those Iraqis.

Give'em a time table and tell'em it's time to step up and take control of your own country. Sure violence will increase, but we'll give our hard working troops some light at the end of the tunnel and extricate ourselves from a bad situation.

We went in to overthrow Saddam, eliminate WMD's and create a democracy. Saddam's set to swing soon and there were no WMD's in the first place. Two out of three is going to have to be good enough. Democracy's a slow process which must come from within. Nobody dragged the Colonists into the war with Britain in 1776 -- we chose it ourselves. The Iraqis must choose their own form of government. We tried to force the Vietnamese into democracy and look what happened.

The war may have been started on pretense, but it must end with resolve. Set a date and stick to it.

Thoughts on "Million Dollar Baby"

Well, I think the Academy got this one right. As good as Sideways and The Aviator were, this one was better. Eastwood and Freeman bicker like an old married couple and it's hilarious. If someone tells you this is just a movie about boxing, don't buy it. The father/daughter relationship which develops between Eastwood and Swank takes it to the next level. The ending is rather melodramatic, but it serves to develop the characters more, so I didn't mind it as much as others. A high recommendation.

More Summer Reading and Films

Chronicles, Vol. 1 by Bob Dylan

• This was just a tease to whet our appetite for the other volumes. He has four chapters, none of which are in chronological order (would we expect any less from Bob). He begins with his arrival in NYC, then moves to the late '80's work with Daniel Lanois, then goes back to his years in Minnesota and then to his breakthrough at Columbia Records. His style is fairly easy to read, but it was like eating Chinese food -- soon after finishing I was hungry for more. I hope the second volume will be a bit more substantial.

Coach Carter

• Lots of basketball and inner city cliches, but an enjoyable film. Samuel L. Jackson holds up his end as usual as the tough love coach who turns the boys around.

Thoughts on Summer Reading

Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince by J.K. Rowling

• Much better than the previous book. Rowling has a good take on teenage behavior regarding friends, sex, etc. It will be curious to see if the tragic ending remains tragic, or if certain characters return (like Gandalf) or make an appearance (like Obi-Wan) in volume seven. The plot was better in this one, avoiding the extraneous sub plots which bogged down the fourth and fifth books (Hermoine's elf crusade was particularly irritating). I'm eagerly waiting the last installment.

White Noise by Dom Delillo

• I've struggled with Delillo novels before, but I managed to slog through this one. A late 80's rant on the influence of television and the fear of death. Considering the boring lives the characters lead, I'm shocked they don't long for death as a simple change in routine. Tough characters to care about, and since there isn't much of a plot, there's not much to recommend this book.

Secrets by Daniel Ellsburg

• I put off reading this book for a couple of years, and I now regret waiting. Great look at the 60's from someone who lived it (Ellsburg went to 'Nam, worked for the government and leaked the "Pentagon Papers" which revealed that the U.S. knew they were in a no win situation from the start, but no one wanted to admit it). He takes you from the Gulf of Tonkin incident (a complete fraud) to his acquittal on charges of treason in 1972. We see his character develop from hawk to dove along with the country. I show the film version of this story (The Pentagon Papers) to my journalism students.

An American Requiem by James Carroll

• Picked this up for a buck at a library book sale, and it was worth much more. The writer tells his story of the priesthood, Vietnam and his father (a high ranking Air Force officer). It reminded me of A Field of Dreams with the father-son conflict except the root of Carroll's conflict was Vietnam. The son realizes the conflicts his father faced, but too late to reconcile with him. His departure from the priesthood is a shame...The church needs more men of his conscience and intelligence.

How to be Good by Nick Hornby

• I was disappointed by this book. I'd heard great things about Hornby, but this book left me flat. A British housewife can't handle it when her previously loutish husband suddenly gets religion (in some bizarre form) and wants to change the world by giving away many of their possessions and taking in homeless people. She couldn't stand him when he wrote a column for the local newspaper as the "angry man", and now she can't stand him as a do-gooder. She whines about finding some middle ground and feels guilty about her selfishness. I cared more about their two children than I did about the husband and wife who were the main characters.

Thoughts on "The Aviator"

I haven't seen Million Dollar Baby yet, but it must have been good to beat out this film for Best Picture. Scorcese knows biopics (see Raging Bull). Leo channels Howard Hughes as part Rain Man, part Cast Away. Blanchette deserved her honor with her portrayal as Hepburn. It was long (2 hr. 50 mins.), but kept the interest as we followed Hughes into his own personal hell.

I loved the colors used in the film. Lots of pastels fit well with the time period.

Thoughts on "Closer"

Just hearing Julia Roberts talk dirty was enough to recommend this film.

After viewing, I'm left wondering which character is the most reprehensible. Clive Owen's (he should be the next James Bond) character was a manipulative brute, but at least he was honest. Jude Law as the hopeless romantic seeking total honesty from everyone but himself was the most devastated by the whole mess. Natalie Portman's stripper with the heart of gold finally stood up for herself at the end. Excellent choice of roles for her. After seeing her in this film, it's hard to say she will be typecast as the "Senator Amidala" character for the rest of her career.

Despite all this, the Julia Roberts character was the most reprehensible. She could not decide what she wanted and thus ended up stuck in a marriage she never wanted. The final scene of her rolling over in bed with the look of resignation on her face was the perfect ending for this cynical film. Damien Rice's "The Blower's Daughter" was a great choice to bookend the film.

Some strange stylistic choices by Nichols. At several points in the film, time jumps dramatically and the view is left to infer this from the dialogue. I guess this was left over from the original stage production. You also rarely see a film with no minor characters. With a couple of brief exceptions, the four main characters are the only ones who speak. Again, I guess this is left over from the stage production (probably just a four person show).

The film was a great alternative to sappy summer romance films. It could have been titled When Harry Screwed Around too Much and Sally became a Stripper.

Thoughts on the Gipper

I come to bury Ronald Reagan, not to praise him.

Even the most liberal democrat cannot deny Ronald Reagan's skill as a politician. He had a vision and a strong set of principles from which he would not deviate. Unfortunately, his vision and principles left many in our nation behind.

If you watched the funeral procession down Pennsylvania Avenue to the Capital Building, did you notice a rather pale complexion to most of the mourners? Did you see many people of color claim that Reagan was their "hero"? Didn't think so. Eight years of massive tax cuts for the wealthy white folks and massive cuts to social programs didn't endear him to many minorities.

Listening to the praise heaped upon Reagan tries many people's patience. He was lauded as a brilliant communicator and a visionary who made the country feel good about itself again. Unfortunately, he only made maybe one quarter of our country feel good about itself. As for the others, they're still waiting for the "trickle down" to reach them.

Conservatives argue that he brought an end to the Cold War, but Mikhail Gorbachev had much more to do with that.

Conservatives argue that he brought us out of a recession. Ask George the Elder what it was like trying to pay the bill for Reagan's tax cuts and defense build up. Poppy never knew how right he was when he characterized Reagan's economic policy as "voodoo economics" during the 1980 Republican primary campaign.

Conservatives argue that he saw American as a "shining city on a hill". Unfortunately, it was more like the "gated community on a hill". Most couldn't get past the security booth. His policies and beliefs worked well for big business (especially defense contractors -- Halliburtan anyone?), but left the rest (a majority) of the nation with catsup as a vegetable and a drug policy of "Just Say No".

The seeds of Enron and Halliburton were sown during the Eighties with the Savings and Loan scandal. The conditions that fostered the Rodney King riots developed in the Eighties with the cuts in social programs for the inner cities. Some would argue that he saw the best in us as a nation, but really he brought out the worst. Greed. Bigotry. Intolerance.

Conservatives argue that he had the ability to rise above the every day issues to see the big picture. Unfortunately, on his way to immortality, he tended to overlook things like the Constitution, Civil Rights and compassion. In speaking of former President Reagan, Vice President Dick Cheney claimed that Reagan gave "hope to the oppressed." What hope did he give to the people of Flint, Michigan, which became a ghost town as a result of Reagan's deficit spending?

Now that the pomp and overkill of the State/Hollywood funeral has faded, it's time to recognize Ronald Wilson Reagan for what he was: a man who saw the city on the hill, not the millions who were denied entry to that city. A man who made the country feel good about itself rather than facing harsher truths. A man who brought the country out of a recession only to create a larger one.

A man of style, not substance.

What it's all about...

After trying to explain to my naive students (is that redundant?) why people want to come to this country ("Why can't they just stay in their own country?" was one bright comment), I thought back to my recent trip to D.C. and the things I experienced. I started off at the Holocaust Museum and then worked my way around the mall in a counter-clockwise direction.

This is what America is all about.

It's about a game of cricket on the Washington Mall.

It's about German tourists in the Holocaust Museum.

It's about a Vietnamese family visiting the Vietnam Veterans Memorial.

It's about Japanese vendors at the Roosevelt Memorial.

It's about the dozens of languages spoken outside the gates of the White House.

It's about Muslim taxi drivers driving past the captial building.

It's about walking into your Senator's office for a quick chat.

It's about southerners and African-Americans touring the Lincoln Memorial.

It's about Republicans marrying Democrats.

They all come here because, for the most part, we tolerate (with the possible exception of open sexuality) just about anything. Where they are coming from, very little is tolerated.

We're hip deep in the manure pile that is an election year, and the accusations are flying around like little children at Disney World. Four years ago, the election was decided by nine men and women who ruled that Florida's votes would not be recounted. The current president actually lost the popular vote but still won the election. Yet the system prevailed, power was transferred and very few people lost any sleep. Ho-hum.

Even the most devestating attack on the mainland in almost 200 years hasn't truly phased us. How much has your (with apologies to those who lost loved ones on 9/11) daily routine changed?

Not much bothers us, so who is going to pay attention to a few extra people crossing the border?

Someday, maybe my students will understand this.

Answer the questions now

Ever watched a movie with a five year-old? There were fewer questions in the Watergate hearings.

"Who's that? Why is he doing that?"

"What's her name?"

"Where is she going?"

It's maddening. But these are the easy questions to answer.

Recently, we watched Disney's Pirates of the Caribbean. We skipped over the more violent scenes. Ah, the joy of DVD.

"Are they bad guys?" he asked as the Black Pearl floated into view.

The world of a five year-old is nostalgically simple: there are good guys and bad guys.

When we watch a sporting event on television, he wants to know, "Who do we want to win?" We always need someone to root for; it's that simple.

Good guys and bad guys. Winners and losers. Now I have a question: When will I have to tell him that life's not that simple?

Perhaps the worst part of children playing video games (he's playing Jimmy Neutron vs. Jimmy Negatron right now) is not that their minds get exposed to senseless violence or that they could be spending the time reading instead. Maybe the most dangerous effect of video games is the reinforcement of the idea that there are good guys and there are bad guys and it's just that simple.

It's easy to explain to my son that the violence he sees is make believe and that he shouldn't act that way in the real world. How do I explain George W. Bush? Joe Horn? Michael Jackson ? (he recently saw Jacko's picture on the TV and said, "She looks mean." How could I argue?) Are they good guys or bad guys?

The police are good guys right? Professional athletes? Catholic priests? Um, well...sort of.

What's harder, telling a child the truth about Santa Claus, or explaining that some police are bad guys? "But, Dad, I thought you said only good guys were allowed to have guns?" Um, yes...but...

My son still has no idea about 9/11 or Saddam Hussein. He doesn't know about O.J. Simpson or Rodney King. He doesn't know about Monica Lewinsky or Bill Clinton.

How long can I keep him in this state of absolutes? How long do I dare?

At some point, I have to explain that strangers are not to be trusted.

I have to explain that if someone touches him and he doesn't like it, he needs to tell us.

I have to explain that Mom and Dad are not going to live forever.

I have to explain that it's not always easy to tell the good guys from the bad.

Then comes the hard question. "Well, how will I know who's good and who's bad?"

I guess that's where we really earn our money as parents. We have to give them the instincts and judgment to determine this on their own. But what do we say? We can't tell them not to trust anyone, but we have to tell them to be wary of strangers. How does a stranger become a friend if you don't trust them?

There are no easy answers to these questions.

I guess I should cherish these simple days and his simple questions. I'd better answer them, or he'll stop asking me questions and turn to someone else when he needs to know where babies come from or what marijuana is. Or why that priest is being arrested. Or why some people have so much money and others are starving.

Hopefully, I'll have a few more years to find the answers.