Impoverish Russia by Drilling for Oil

The biggest export from Russia is oil and natural gas.  In 2015, that constituted about 60% of exports.  As the price of oil rises, Russia's economic fortunes improve.  The same goes for the Middle East.  Oil producers love when the gas price goes up.   As we know that Russia is enriched by high oil and natural gas prices, it follows that we should try to keep the prices as low as possible.  Heck, if we could drive the price down far enough, we might even make it unprofitable to continue producing oil.  Can we do that?  Yes.  A couple of years ago, the US was a net exporter of energy, for the first time in decades.  Now, we are buying Russian oil!  We are funding Russia.  Why?  Because we canceled the XL Pipeline, we reduced fracking, we're back on the Climate Change bandwagon.  Russia's not on that bandwagon and they are benefiting from our reduced production.  As supply goes down, price goes up.  More profit for Putin.

It has been reported that Russia has funded anti-nuclear and anti-fracking groups in Europe and the US to hamstring competition.  As Europe reduces its ability to provide power for itself, Russia steps in with the Nord Stream 2 pipeline.  Wow, look at that.  Russia and the Middle East benefit immensely when the West limits domestic energy production and thus become beholden to these foreign sources who don't give a damn about climate change.

If we are serious about hobbling Russia, we have to stop buying oil from Russia and return to being a net exporter of energy.  We've done it before, very recently, therefore we can do it again.  Drive those oil prices down and Russia won't be able to afford invasions.

Support Your Local Sheriff! (1969)

Jason McCullogh (James Garner) is on his way to Australia when he passes through the gold rush town of Calendar, Colorado.  The town is chaotic and dangerous, inflation is devastating, and the Danby family is skimming 20% of the gold profits.  McCullough has a notion of getting some of the gold while he is in the area but doesn't have enough money to even start a claim.  Looking for a job, he sees that the town needs a sheriff.  Two of the last 3 sheriffs were killed, while the 3rd fled town.  Despite the dire history, he takes the job.  There follows a series of comic antics as he tames the rowdy town, woos the mayor's daughter (Joan Hackett), and faces the Danby clan, led by Pa Danby (Walter Brennan).

The movie is a goofball comedy.  Joan Hackett spends most of the film embarassing herself in front of Garner.  Jack Elam plays a hilariously ill-used sidekick and deputy.  Harry Morgan is the mayor.  Bruce Dern gets to play the dim-witted Joe Danby who spends the majority of the film in a jail with no bars.

Great popcorn fun.

Jean-Baptiste Charboneau: Man of Two Worlds

Jean-Baptiste Charboneau was born in 1805, the son of Sacagawea and Toussaint Charboneau.  He had hardly been born when Toussaint and Sacagawea were recruited by Lewis and Clark on their Voyage of Discovery.  During the 2-year adventure, William Clark grew very fond of Jean-Baptiste, whom he affectionately called "Pomp."  At the journey's end, Clark asked to raise the boy as his own in St. Louis, promising to provide an excellent education and far more opportunities than he would have in the Upper Missouri (what would become North Dakota).  This was agreed.  Clark went on to be the territorial governor and the Indian agent for the West.  He did provide an excellent education and many opportunities for Jean-Baptiste.  When Jean was 18, he met a German royal and was invited to travel to Europe.  He went to Europe for 5 years, where he learned French and German.  When he returned from a life of luxury, he embraced a life as a mountain man.  He hunted and trapped in the dangerous wilds of the West.  He was occasionally hired as a guide for military expeditions and even encountered Captain Fremont and Kit Carson during one of their famous expeditions.  In 1846, he was working as a hunter at Bent's Fort in Southeast Colorado when the Mexican-American War was declared.  His talents needed, he was soon guiding the Mormon Battalion across the deserts of New Mexico, Arizona, and California.  He remained in California and soon joined the Gold Rush.  He lived in Auburn, CA, for the next 15 years.  Word of a new gold strike in Montana lured him back on the trail.  Sadly, he died on the way in Southeast Oregon.  He was 61.

The book is an enjoyable read that gives a good overview of the era in which JB Charboneau lived.  Ritter provides an excellent background for the environs in which Charboneau lived.  He also offered details about what the life of a trapper or guide or mountain man.  However, Charboneau himself is still something of a mystery.  There is very little from the man himself.  No diary, no correspondence, no records of his statements and views.  We know the kind of life he lived, but not why he chose this path.  Also, he never married though he did have two children.  One, born in Germany, died in infancy.  The other, born in California, probably lived to adulthood and had children of her own.

Very good book and definitely recommended for anyone interested in the ante-bellum American West.  One of the interesting comments from the author was that Kit Carson only became famous because Fremont selected him.  Charboneau, and many others, were equally qualified and might have become legendary figures but for the chance that brought Fremont to Carson instead.

The House of Fear (1945)

In a Scottish town, a group of 7 men created a club called the Good Comrades.  Recently, one of the comrades received an envelope that contained 6 orange pips.  Soon after, he died a horrible death.  Then an envelope arrived for another comrade, this time with 5 orange pips.  He too died a horrible death.  It was at this point that the insurance company called upon Sherlock Holmes (Basil Rathbone).  Each man had life insurance which was paid to the surviving members of Good Comrades; they suspect foul play by one of the remaining members.  Holmes and Watson (Nigel Bruce) arrive to investigate.  There is reason to suspect everyone.  Despite their presence, the envelopes of orange pips come and horrible deaths follow.  Can Holmes uncover the culprit before more men die horribly?

The story bears little resemblance to The Adventure of The Five Orange Pips.  Most of the Good Comrades aren't good; Holmes even noted that one of them had gotten away with murder through a legal loophole, a fact that put him on the top of the suspect list.  The idea of 7 men living in a remote castle seems bizarre to a modern viewer.  Maybe that was more typical in a bygone era.  Lestrade (Dennis Hoey) arrives to bumble around and contrast with Holmes' keen observations.

Entertaining to watch but disappointing as a whodunit.  Holmes only catches the villain because the villain took an action that, in retrospect, makes no sense.  Holmes can explain everything at that point but had been helpless to prevent the continuing murders.  Though not a great movie, it is always fun to watch Rathbone and Bruce.

A Farewell to Arms (1932)

Frederic (Gary Cooper) is an American in Italy during the Great War.  He is an ambulance driver.  Upon returning from his recent stint at the front with many wounded in his ambulance, he meets his good friend, Rinaldi (Adolphe Menjou).  Rinaldi has great plans to go out drinking and meeting the ladies, but asks for some money first.  The pair meet some nurses.  Frederic finds he is attracted to the one that Rinaldi has chosen, Catherine (Helen Hayes).  He steals her from him, causing some hard feelings.  In a flash, Frederic and Cahterine are in love, but he has to go back to the front.  Seeing as Catherine is ruining his friendship with Frederic, Rinaldi has her reassigned to Milan.  Meanwhile, on the front, Frederic has been wounded.  After patching him up, Rinaldi sends him to Milan for recovery; clearly, he feels guilty now that his friend is injured.

The movie feels incomplete and disjointed.  There are some things that the viewer must figure out for himself.  Frederic and Catherine are lovers and she is pregnant.  Nope, can't have that in a movie.  There are multiple flash-cuts, that clearly show something is missing.  Often, I wasn't quite certain what was going on and why some of the characters were helping Frederic.  Checking on IMDb, it shows that censors snipped some of the film and Hemingway was very unhappy with the results.  However, he was impressed with Gary Cooper and suggested him for For Whom the Bell Tolls.

Cooper portrays the hunky American well and Menjou is great as Rinaldi.  I loved how he kept calling Frederic 'Baby.'  He was a very likeable Italian doctor.  Helen Hayes was miscast.  Her American accent didn't go with playing an English nurse.  Also, the 5 foot tall Hayes was positively dwarfed by the 6'3" Cooper.  I could see her attraction to him, but not his to her.

Mediocre.

Death on the Nile (1978)

In England, Jackie (Mia Farrow) asks her friend Linnet (Lois Chiles) to give her soon-to-be husband, Simon Doyle (Simon MacCorkindale) a job.  Linnet agrees.  Six weeks later, Simon and Linnet are on their honeymoon in Egypt.  Not only has an insanely jealous Jackie followed them, so has a cast of suspects.  Romance novelist Salome Otterbourne (Angela Lansbury) and her daughter, Rosalie (Olivia Hussey) may be financially ruined on account of a lawsuit by Linnet.  Mrs. Van Schuyler (Bette Davis) is a wealthy woman with a love of jewelry, especially pearls like the dazzling necklace that Linnet wears.  Van Schuyler's nurse, Miss Bowers (Maggie Smith), had been reduced to being a servant on account of Linnet's father's business practices.  Doctor Bessner (Jack Warden) may see his clinic ruined on account of the harsh criticisms that Linnet has leveled.  Andrew Pennington (George Kennedy), who is Linnet's uncle, has been embezzling funds and could be ruined should Linnet discover it.  Even Linnet's maid, Louise (Jane Birkin), is upset at her employer for derailing her marriage plans.  This hornets' nest of would-be murderers has the misfortune of encountering the famed Hercule Poirot (Peter Ustinov).  Linnet requests his assistance in ridding them of Jackie and he is soon traveling with them and the cast of suspects on the SS Karnak down the Nile.  It is little surprise when Linnet is found dead.  Poirot is joined in his investigation by Colonel Race (David Niven), an old friend and occasional assistant.  As the pair interview all the suspects, additional murders occur.

The all-star cast is terrific in this version.  Poirot is fastidious and has an uncanny knack of being in earshot of all the incriminating conversations, which he parrots back at the enraged suspect.  Unlike the recent remake, this one was filmed in Egypt.  Just this puts it head and shoulders above the Branagh production.  Better still, no anachronistic casting, no efforts to represent this group or that group, just a straight-forward adaptation of the novel.

After watching both versions, I must say that the plan was ludicrous.  A gunshot on a ship the size of the Karnak should have drawn more people.  The idea that there would be no one around seems unlikely.  The stars had to align for the outlandish plot to work.  Also, Hercule Poirot is on the ship!  Are you crazy?  Time to abort the plan and wait for another time.  Heck, maybe wait for whoever pushed the rock to give it another try.

I've not seen the David Suchet version of Death on the Nile.  Until I do, I rate this one the best.  Highly recommended.

Peacemaker

The HBO series pickups up soon after The Suicide Squad concludes.  Peacemaker (John Cena) has recovered from his bullet wound and being caught under a collapsing building.  Surprised that no one has arrived to put him back in jail, he goes to his home, a mobile home that is painted in patriotic colors.  However, it turns out he is not free.  An independent group - including two office operatives seen in The Suicide Squad - impress him into service.  Clemson Murn (Chukwudi Iwuji) is the leader of the team and declares they are up against the Butterflies.  Harcourt (Jennifer Holland) and Economos (Steve Agee) have been assigned to the task force as a punishment for their actions in The Suicide Squad.  The crew also has a greenhorn agent named Leota Adebayo (Danielle Brooks), who is actually the daughter of Amanda Waller (Viola Davis).  Added to the crew is Vigilante (Freddie Stroma), Peacemaker's occasional partner.

Though Peacemaker remains a homicidal goofball, much like he was in his last appearance, there is a lot of character development.  His dynamic with his abusive and racist father, Auggie Smith (Robert Patrick), explains how he came to be who he is.  His father is also the White Dragon, an Iron Man like supervillain with high-tech battle armor and a variety of powerful helmets that Peacemaker acquires.

The opening credits scene is awesome.  All the characters dance onto the stage like some Vegas show.  It is so unexpected and funny that I watched it virtually every episode.  Great stuff.

The downside of the series is the insertion of politics.  There is a big message about environmentalism and how humanity is on a course to destroy the earth.  Yeah, okay.  Also, it turns out that Leota is a lesbian and her wife appears in most of the episodes to voice concerns about what Leota is doing.  5'5" Harcourt easily trounces a thug who is nearly a foot taller and a hundred pounds heavier.  Fine.  White males get all the big character flaws: Vigilante is abysmally stupid, Peacemaker's father is a rabid racist, John Economos is a mostly pathetic loser, and Peacemaker is a dim bulb.  By contrast, Murn is competent and focused.  Harcourt is kickass and qualifies for a serious spy thriller.  Leota is a noob who blossoms into a hero.  However, she is the butt of some physical comedy, something mostly reserved for the white males.

Despite the modern political tropes, the show is highly watchable and quite entertaining.  I look forward to further antics from Peacemaker and his crew.  Recommended.

The Return of Durham

Special Counsel John Durham has alleged that Hillary Clinton's campaign hired hackers to infiltrate Trump's servers and plant evidence that could then be used to trigger Mueller's investigation.  Essentially, Durham has confirmed Trump's story that his wires were tapped and that the Russian collusion story was a hoax.  Worse, this spying continued after Trump was in office.  Worse still, Obama was aware that Hillary was hacking Trump and basically ignored it.  I would say that is a convenient result for Trump, except that it is over a year too late.  If true and it results in convictions, it means that Democrats are gunning for Hillary and her supporters.  Republicans are spineless cowards and never play hardball like Democrats play hardball.

The insiders were so desperate to prevent an outsider from being elected that they allowed shenanigans that they would abhor in most elections.  Once Trump was in, the shenanigans were at threat of being exposed so Trump had to be vilified so his claims could be dismissed as crazy ravings.  Of course, now that Trump is out, Durham can be allowed to expose some of the shenanigans and take out a slew of Clinton supporters.  Astonishing as it may seem, the Clinton wing of the Democrat party is the moderates.  Bill Clinton's presidency is practically Republican compared to modern Democrat views.

Whether or not this is true or a bombshell, it will probably come to little or nothing in the end.  Little more than a footnote in some future history.  Trump will be cast as a danger to democracy and a threat to republicanism for several decades at least.  He was, and remains, a danger to the status quo.  The status quo has control of most of the media, all the intelligence agencies, most of academia, and more than 90% of the governing bureaucracy.  Trump opposed Leviathan and lost.

Academy Awards for Obscure Movies

Yes, it is that time again and the academy has nominated the best films of 2021.  The runaway winner in pure number of nominations is that blockbuster film: The Power of the Dog.  As I'm sure everyone knows, this stellar film has earned nearly $55,000 at the box office.  No, that is not a misprint.  Just 55 thousand dollars and it has garnered 12 nominations.  Impressive.  Of the 10 movies nominated for best picture, I have seen two.  Best director: 0.  Best Actor: 0.  Best Actress: 0.  What is the point of watching an award show about movies I didn't see?  In fact, most people didn't see.

According to Box Office Mojo, here are the rankings of the best pictures by ticket sales:

The top twelve films don't merit recognition from the academy.  Even among the chosen few, the dwindling audience share is dramatic.  Three times as many people have seen Dune compared to West Side Story.  Twice as many have seen West Side Story compared to King Richard.  Despite these numbers, the champ on this list is at the very bottom with virtually no audience beyond the academy itself.  The biggest movie of the year, Spider-Man: No Way Home, received one nomination: Best Visual Effects.

I enjoyed Dune.  I didn't enjoy Nightmare Alley.  The rest are a mystery to me.

Death on the Nile (2022)

Our story opens in 1914 with a unit of Belgian soldiers ordered on a suicide mission.  Luckily, a young soldier proposes a different plan.  This is Hercule Poirot.  The plan works, mostly.  However, Hercule is hit in the face by shrapnel.  His fiancé suggests he grow a mustache to hide the scars.  Twenty-three years later, the mustachioed Hercule visits a blues joint in London.  It just so happens that he witnesses the meeting of Linnet Ridgeway (Gal Gadot) and Simon Doyle (Armie Hammer).  Doyle is engaged to marry one of Linnet's friends, Jacqueline, but one cannot help but notice an attraction between Simon and Linnet.

Six weeks later, Poirot is in Egypt.  He happens upon Bouc (Tom Bateman), who served as an assistant in Murder on the Orient Express (2017).  Bouc invites him to join him and his mother (Annette Benning) in celebrating a wedding.  On arrival, he discovers that Simon has married Linnet.  A very disappointed Jacqueline has followed them on their various honeymoon stops.  Linnet approached Poirot and asked him to look out for her; she does not feel safe among any of the guests on the tour.  Gee, I wonder who is going to be murdered.

Branagh's Poirot is an action hero.  In both films, he dodges bullets and chases escaping culprits.  There's not a lot of action, but certainly more action than one would see from David Suchet, Peter Ustinov, or Albert Finney.  In addition to a dash of action, Branagh's Poirot is also obsessive compulsive.  He likes his eggs to be the same size, the feet of corpses to point in the same direction, desserts to be served in an amount that can be organized into a triangle (3 or 6, but not 7).  This seemed appropriate and the type of personality that would aid in his manic attention to detail and noticing things that don't quite line up.  I like the OCD, but drop the action hero aspect.

The movie has very anachronistic attitudes.  Bouc is in love with Rosalie (Letitia Wright), who is black.  Now, that would not raise eyebrows in 2022, but would be scandalous in 1937.  The same goes for Poirot's attentions toward Salome (Sophie Okonedo), the aunt of Rosalie.  Then there is Linnet's cousin, Katchadourian.  He is Indian, which hints at further interracial couplings.  None of this is viewed as scandalous or out of the ordinary.  The previous film in the series has this same ahistorical treatment of race when Daisy Ridley's character planned to marry Leslie Odom's character.  Just to hit all the demographics, there is also a lesbian couple, though they are concealing their relationship.  This ahistorical treatment of race has blanketed British films of the past decade (e.g. Mary, Queen of Scots).  On the one hand, I like the idea of depicting racial harmony, but on the other hand this feels like rewriting history.

There is a lot of CGI for the setting.  Pyramids, the sphinx, and other noted locations are all CGI.  As with the anachronistic casting, this took me out of the film.  Rather than thinking how amazing these Egyptian monuments are, I was thinking that the CGI wasn't convincing.  The Spy Who Loved Me (1977) filmed in Egypt and I remember how cool the 'sets' were.  45 years later and it's unconvincing CGI.  One expects better quality over time, not worse.

There is one other nitpick.  It is highly unlikely that a bullet from a dinky .22 caliber pistol could go through one person's torso and still have enough kinetic energy left to inflict a lethal chest wound on another person.  I'm sure that most gun aficionados groaned when that happened.

It is okay.  I prefer Peter Ustinov's Death on the Nile (1978) over this one.  Likewise, I thought Albert Finney's Murder on the Orient Express (1974) was better than Branagh's adaptation.

Sahara (1943)

On a battlefield near Tobruk, Lybia, the radio operator of a tank gets word to retreat.  He calls out to Sergeant Gunn (Humphrey Bogart) to let him know.  Gunn and Waco are scavenging parts from the wreckage of another tank to make repairs on theirs.  While the artillery is still exploding about them, they make hasty repairs before driving south into the Sahara.  They come upon the ruins of a field hospital and recruit a variety of British soldiers from a variety of backgrounds.  Gunn is willing to take them along, though he will be in charge if they do come.  They agree.  Yet further along, they spot two men trekking through the desert.  There is Sgt. Tambul, a Sudanese soldier, and Giuseppe, an Italian prisoner.  Tambul knows the country and will be a useful resource for finding much needed water.  Giuseppe is just a liability and best left in the desert.  Or not?

There are a series of adversities to overcome as the tank crew and passengers try to rejoin the British Army.  Through this, each soldier has an opportunity to develop.  Jimmy the radio operator is from New York, Waco is from Texas, Sgt. Joe Gunn is from the US Army.  Captain Halliday hails from Ireland and has the most compassion of the soldiers, not surprising considering his profession.  Stegman hails from a dorp (village) in South Africa.  Clarkson (a very young Lloyd Bridges) has a girl named Katie back home. Williams is widely-read, not because he is well-educated but because he sets type for books; he is called professor.  Tambul is a Muslim but only has one wife.

The movie culminates in a battle over an oasis between the small band of Allied soldiers and a battalion of Germans.  Gunn says it's a hundred to one shot that any of them survive but it is their duty to slow the Germans down, delay them while the Allies regroup.  It is an intense battle.  However, this was one of my few qualms with the movie.  Why did the Germans attack from only one direction?  Had they encircled the oasis, it would have been no fight at all.  There was nothing to keep them from launching flanking attacks and certainly not enough defenders to do anything about it.

Excellent movie and definitely recommended.  Great popcorn fun.

Steering the Story

When I was a eleven or twelve, my brother and I spent a summer at our grandparents' house in Iowa.  Grandma was a skilled card player and we played many card games while there.  Grandma also had a magic trick.  You would select a card and place it in the deck and she would then ask you to select suits until you had only your suit left.  Then she would ask you to select card ranges until it finally narrowed down to YOUR CARD!  However, after a couple of times through, it became clear that she was really the one selecting.

Grandma: "Pick two suits."

Me: "Spades and diamonds."

Grandma: "That leaves you with Hearts and Clubs.  Pick one of those."

Me: "Clubs."

Grandma: "Among the clubs, pick face cards or numbers."

Me: "Face cards."

Grandma: "That leaves you with numbers.  Pick high or low numbers."

As you can see, Grandma either eliminated my selection or stuck with it, depending on what my card was.  She always steered me to my card.  The mainstream media does something similar.

BLM firebombs a police station in Minneapolis.

Media: Mostly peaceful protest

Tea Party protests tax and spend policies

Media: Intolerant racists hate black president

BLM blocks off part of Seattle and declares it the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone (CHAZ)

Media: Mostly peaceful protest.  Look! Someone has started farming!

Truckers protest mask & vaccine mandates in Canada by driving to Ottawa and honking horns

Media: Nazis!  Fascists!  Danger to democracy!

Antifa tosses firebombs in both Berkley and Portland, deface buildings, break windows

Media: Antifa are activists and protesters who oppose Trump's fascist agenda

Parents attending school board meetings demand removal of Critical Race Theory curriculum

Media: Domestic terrorists threaten teachers

After a while, it becomes clear that the media describes violent rioters who lean left as mostly peaceful and generally justified in their actions, though perhaps a bit overenthusiastic.  However, non-violent protesters who lean right are domestic terrorists and insurrectionists.  These wrongheaded radicals need to feel the full force of the law and be denounced at every opportunity.  The media selects the adjectives and positive or negative coverage based more on the politics of the 'protesters' rather than the actions.

Ukraine: Should We Care?

Obviously, we should care about war and strife, but is this our fight?  I would argue not.  Some years ago, I was looking at comparative economies and was astonished to find that Russia was quite unimpressive.  According to 2017 numbers, the USA had a $19 trillion economy, China was at $12 trillion, and Russia was $1.6 trillion.  Canada had a bigger economy in 2017.  Germany has twice the economy of Russia. If just the big names of Europe (France, Germany, UK, & Italy all have bigger economies than Russia) pooled resources, they have an $11 trillion economy.  Hey, what if we added Spain, Portugal, Sweden, Denmark, and so on combined resources?  That would be roughly $18 trillion.  Why can't they deal with the comparative pauper of Russia?  It's in their backyard, not ours.  No, let's have the US taxpayer bail us out again, as they have been doing since World War II.  The combined population of France and Germany is 150 million.  Russia is at 145 million and falling.  Europe has more than enough resources to deal with Russia.

Only 6 months ago, the Biden Administration fled a backwater where the opposition was armed with AK-47s and little more.  Too tough.  Oh, but nuclear-armed Russia with tanks, jets, missiles, artillery, and so forth is a fight that we can handle.  Nope.  Europe has spent the last 77 years outsourcing its defense to the United States.  I think it's time they resume control.

Death Valley Days: George Vest

It is 1869 and 12-year-old Andy Cody is running outside with his dog, Johnny.  Johnny races ahead and Andy hears two gunshots.  Catching up to Johnny, Andy sees the dog is dead and Carter Johnson standing nearby with a shotgun.  Andy is understandably upset, but Johnson declares that he repeatedly warned Andy to keep off his property.  Demanding justice for the unwarranted killing of his dog, Andy asks George Graham Vest (Ronald Reagan) to sue Johnson for damages.  Vest agrees.  Soon, Johnson is in court to defend himself from the $500 suit over a 10-year-old mutt not worth more than 50 cents.  The evidence clearly shows that the dog had little value and was indeed trespassing.  In his summation, Vest orated about friendship and the loyalty of a dog.  The jury found in favor of Andy.

Interestingly, this is a true story though many of the names have been changed.  Why?  Leonidas Hornsby, a sheep farmer, shot Old Drum after having announced his intention to kill any dog found on his property.  Charles Burden, Old Drum's owner, sought recompence.  As shown, Vest won the case more on account of his moving oratory than any evidence.  Rather than $500, Burden was awarded $50.

There are some noteworthy things that the episode glossed over.  Carter Johnson is supposedly a man with political influence and Vest plans to run for Senate.  That he pursues the suit anyway shows what an upstanding lawyer he is.  Hmm.  George Vest was for the Confederacy.  He argued to maintain slavery in Missouri and later became a Representative and Senator in the Confederate government.  In 1870, when the suit went to trial, Vest had no reason to fear the influence of a sheep farmer.  Furthermore, as a former Confederate office holder during Reconstruction (1865-1877), he was ineligible for election.  He was not elected to the US Senate until 1879, when Reconstruction had ended.  Senators were selected by the state assembly and didn't get popular votes as they do today.

Entertaining and an interesting bit of American history, but too many liberties were taken to view it as educational.

Oil Prices Highest in 7 Years

The price for a barrel of oil has broken $90, the highest it has been since 2014.  A year ago, I paid $2.16 a gallon for gas.  Two years ago, it was $1.87.  Today, it is $2.99.  Of course, Texas has some of the lowest gas prices.  It is around $5 a gallon in California.

Back in the days when I watched Bill O'Reilly, he would declare that some nefarious cabal was setting the gas price to screw 'the folks' to benefit fat cats on Wall Street.  He never got around to explaining why the price would go down.  Having studied economics and having a basic understanding of supply and demand, I had no trouble offering reasons why the price rose; this was shortly after Hurricane Katrina.

If Bill really thought a rising gas price benefited the holders of oil stocks - it does - then he should have bought oil stocks to make what he thought would be an obvious profit.  I forget who suggested that at the time, but I took it to heart.  When I started buying individual stocks, one of the first things I did was buy an oil stock.  When the oil price falls, I celebrate filling my car with cheap gas.  When the price soars, I celebrate that I'm a fat cat.  Right now, I'm a fat cat paying for expensive gas.  In 2020, my oil stocks crashed, but I had cheap gas.

Readers

Approximately one quarter of US adults have not read a book in the last year, 1 in 3 men, and 1 in 5 women.  For people with a high school education or less, 44% have not read a book in the last year.  By contrast, only 8% of college graduates haven't read a book in the last year.  People who earn under $30K per year are about a third as likely to have read a book as someone who earns more than $75K a year.  Reading corelates with success.

Many people cease reading once they are not obligated to do so in school.  That means we have a narrow window in which to provide reading material to a large chunk of students.  Do we offer them books that paint the country in a negative light, a positive light, or a neutral light?  I'm for positive.  Why have someone graduate high school viewing their country as an imperialistic, racist, colonial power?  I could provide a curriculum - all true - that exposed all the worst of the United States and have every student who didn't take it upon themselves to read other accounts to hate America and wish for its destruction.  Such students would be bad citizens.  Why do that?  On the other hand, I could also assemble a curriculum that would paint America as the greatest and most selfless country that has ever existing, a shining beacon of freedom for the world.  Again, all of it true.  Students who went through this curriculum would be proud of their country but ignorant of its flaws.  They would be patriotic citizens who might parrot Decatur: "...our country, right or wrong!"  I could also compose a curriculum that would provide both the good and the bad, which would be the best choice.  However, there's a lot to read for that final version and elementary and secondary civics courses are poor place for them.  This is the format I would choose for those who want to know, who will checkout books on history and read from David McCullough and Stephen Ambrose to William Appleman Williams and Howard Zinn.

Considering that nearly half of high school graduates will read very little once they are released from their brief stint of scholarship, what kind of citizens do you want wandering the streets?  Those who go on to college will read vastly more.  Those interested in knowing more about their country will have all the resources they want.  No need to worry about them, high school was just a primer.  I would choose the pro-American curriculum.

As it happens, that does not appear to be the one selected.  Considering how many young people have mostly negative views of their country, it sure seems as though the anti-American curriculum has been chosen.  From the 1619 Project to the tearing down of statues of historical figures, the United States is swarming with people more interested in tearing it down.  There are few enough people defending the country that politicians think it safer to cave to the demands of anti-American youth.

Texas Book Ban

Considering how I rail against censorship, I must surely be opposed to removing books from school libraries.  Not so much.  I went through the list of books that NBC detailed.  Most of them are about sexuality and race.  Mostly sexuality.  Now, I would be absolutely opposed to these books being delisted from Amazon, but I don't know that they are appropriate for primary and secondary education.  What is it we want from K-12 education?  

ThoughtCo proposes the following 7 goals:

1. Knowledge to Get By.  This is the core reading, writing, and arithmetic.

2. Knowledge of Subject Matter Being Taught: I have no idea what the person is talking about here.  This seems like advice for the teacher not to get hyper-focused on one subject.  Studetns should be well-rounded.

3. Creating Thoughtful Citizens: Though the paragraph detailing this is vague to the extreme, this is about critical thinking, knowing how to reason.

4. Self-Esteem and Confidence: Self-explanatory and would resolve itself if points 1 and 2 were successful.

5. Learn How to Learn: I forget where I heard it, but the sign of an education person is that they know where to look up information.  Google has made this much easier.

6. Lifelong Habits for Work: This is the socialization aspect.  Dress and behave appropriately, be on time, and so forth.

7. Teach Students How to Live: Another aspect of socialization, such as proper work ettiquette, cooperation, teamwork, etc.

Will the listed books help in any of these areas?  Maybe self-esteem, which really ought not be on the list.  Self-esteem or confidence without actual knowledge or accomplishment is just delusion.  Little Billy has no ability in math, but let's not damage his self-esteem by giving him grades that show his inability.  Huh?  I am concerned about the ability to communicate this person provided.  Let's try a different site.

The Educator's Room also has 7 goals:

1. To have the basic skills needed to build upon to accomplish whatever task or job is assigned in the future:  Sigh.  Neither brief nor clear.  However, the description is math and language arts are needed for workers of the future.

2. To be a critical thinker: That's better.  Yes, we want people who think rather than feel.  Someone who can analyze information.

3. To be able to troubleshoot or strategize: This is more critical thinking and specifies logical steps to solve problems.  She calls it horse sense.

4. To be a moral person: Ooh, here is a dangerous one.  This fits into socialization.  Kids learn what constitutes good behavior vs. bad behavior.  I would have stated the goal with more secular language.

5. To be a good citizen: Another facet of socialization, this is learning civics, understanding law, and so forth.

6. To have enough interests to be able to have not only a job but outside passions as well: This is about making a person well-rounded.  This is why we have music, art, dance, sports, and other electives in school.

7. To be happy: Self-explanatory and questionable.  This looks like a version of the self-esteem goal from the last one.

A lot of these look repetitive and unclear.  Who writes this stuff?  Let's see what Forbes has to say on the topic:

1. To prepare children for citizenship

2. To cultivate a skilled workforce

3. To teach cultural literacy

4. To help students become critical thinkers

5. To help students compete in a global marketplace

I like this list.  All the goals are so self-explanatory that no detailed description is provided.  I also appreciate that there is no talk of self-esteem or happiness.  If we could teach happiness, we wouldn't have school shooters.  If we could instill self-esteem, we wouldn't have teen suicide.  Dump these nonsense unattainable 'goals' and stick to the concrete stuff.

Back to the books that are proposed for banning: do they help any of the goals?  Are the sex exploits of a gay 17-year-old student a worthwhile book?  Books with rape and pedophilia may provide cultural literacy, but shouldn't that be something for outside of school?  Many of these books might be okay for high school, but I fear they are populating elementary shelves, where they do not belong.

Royal Flash (1975)

Royal Flash follows the adventures of a scoundrel.  While fleeing the London police in 1842, Captain Harry Paget Flashman (Malcolm McDowell) has a chance encounter with Lola Montez (Florinda Bolkan) and Otto Von Bismark (Oliver Reed).  While Bismark tries to expose him to the police, Lola protects him.  Soon, Harry is having an affair with Lola and has made an enemy of Bismark.  The affair with Lola is short-lived and ends poorly.  In 1847, Harry receives a summons from Lola.  She is now the Countess of Landsfeld and the mistress of King Ludwig I of Bavaria.  She has a lucrative offer for him.  Greed and another chance to bed Lola prove an irresistible lure for Harry.  No sooner does he arrive than he is forced to flee with Rudi Von Sternberg (Alan Bates).  He soon finds himself in the hands of Bismark, who has great plans for German unification.  Flashman bears an uncanny resemblance to Prince Carl Magnus and Bismark proposes that he stand in for the absent Prince, who is supposed to marry Duchess Irma (Britt Ekland) of Strackenz.  This is, in fact, a Prisoner of Zenda movie.  There is constant plotting and backstabbing.

The film has the same campy feel as Richard Lester's The Three Musketeer (1973) and The Four Musketeers: Milady's Revenge (1974).  Sadly, it doesn't work this time around.  Much as I like Malcolm McDowell, he is terribly cast.  Flashman is 6'2" and broad-shouldered.  He looks the hero but acts the coward and bully.  Imagine John Wayne taking a role as a cad, coward, and thief; yeah, that's Flashman.  McDowell is only 5'8" and stick thin.  He fits the sniveling coward too well, especially in the wake of his most famous role as Alex in A Clockwork Orange.  He doesn't have the charisma to pull off a roll like Flashman.  Likewise, Florinda Bolkan is wrong for Lola.  When we first meet Lola in 1842, she should be 21 years old, whereas Bolkan is 34.  Lola was Anglo-Irish and had merely adopted a Spanish stage name, but Bolkan is Brazilian and has a dark Mediterranean complexion.  Oliver Reed makes for an excellent Bismark and Alan Bates is entertaining as Rudi.  Britt Ekland is bland as Irma, but it is a tiny and bland role.  It was funny to see Bob Hoskins as a London Constable before he was a big name.

Though planned as the first of a series, it did not do well at the box office.  The author of Flashman, George MacDonald Fraser, wrote the screenplay.  He had also done the screenplays for Lester's Musketeer movies.  Heroic campiness is more charming than cowardly campiness.  Bob Hope was great at playing the horny coward who was still likeable; McDowell doesn't have that talent.

Mediocre.

GoFundMe Double Standard

When BLM set up a GoFundMe account, all was well with the world.  Sure, there were riots and some of the money was used to bail rioters out of jail.  No big deal.  That's fine.  However, when a GoFundMe was setup for Kyle Rittenhouse, that was too much.  Denied.  They didn't want to associate with a man who shot three people, killing two of them.  Okay, I suppose.  It thus came as a bit of a surprise when a GoFundMe for Darrell Brooks was allowed.  He's the guy who ran over all the people at a Kenosha parade, killing 6 and injuring 62.  Huh.  Now GoFundMe has shut down the Freedom Truckers account because they....  didn't kill anyone.  Aren't burning down cities and needing bail money.  What exactly is the problem with them?  Not just a 'mostly' peaceful protest, but an entirely peaceful one.

GoFundMe is obviously political.  If you are black and killed a bunch of people, funding approved.  If you are white and killed people, funding denied.  If you burn down cities and ransack stores to protest the police and/or Trump, funding approved.  If you drive your trucks across Canada to protest vaccine mandates, funding denied.

I am reminded of how Patreon became political, booting various right or libertarian leaning people from its service.  What of all those platforms that almost simultaneously banned Alex Jones.  He broke the rules on all of them at the same time?  Unlikely.  There was coordination there.  The continued efforts to silence people is getting more extreme all the time.  First, it was just protesting and shouting down.  Then it was banning from platforms.  Now it is starving them of funds.  This trend will lead to tyranny or revolution, neither a desired outcome.  We value freedom of speech for a reason and efforts to quash it are playing with fire.

Government-Approved Censorship

In the modern view of the word, censorship can only be practiced by government.  If Time Magazine refused to publish a particular article, that isn't censorship, it's an editorial decision.  The owners of the magazine are not obligated to publish all submissions, nor could they as there are only so many pages available.  However, if the magazine did choose to publish an article and the FBI showed up to get it removed from the magazine, that would be a clear case of censorship.

In this digital age, magazines are being supplanted by websites, articles replaced by podcasts, TV news is being challenged by online news channels.  The interesting thing about these new platforms compared to the old ones is space limitations.  Where there were only so many pages in the newspaper or a magazine, the size online is virtually limitless.  Only so many frequencies for radio or channels on TV?  Again, essentially limitless with the internet.  With capacity no longer a factor, the editorial decisions are more likely to be questioned.  Nonetheless, if Facebook decides that certain people can't use its site, it is a private platform.  Right?  How does that work for brick & mortar businesses that want to exclude people?  A lot less 'editorial' decision there.

With regard to Joe Rogan, would it be censorship if Spotify acquiesced to demands by Neil Young to take down his podcast?  It is a private platform.  Spotify can choose who is on the site and who isn't.  Nothing censorious about that.  However, what if the government announced a preference?  Even if it doesn't send the FBI, government preferences are often enough to nudge business to adopt the preference.  Does the government have a preference regarding Joe Rogan?  Let's see what Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary, said recently when replying to a question on the topic:

“Sure. Well, last July, as you probably know, but the surgeon general also took the unprecedented step to issue an adviser on the risk of misinformation and public health, which is a very significant step and admitted that he talked about the role social media platforms have. So our hope is that all major tech platforms and all major news sources for that matter be responsible and be vigilant to ensure the American people have access to accurate information on something as significant as Covid-19. That certainly includes Spotify. So this disclaimer, it’s a positive step, but we want every platform to continue doing more to call out misinformation while also uplifting accurate information. I mean look at the facts right?”

Spotify has taken the step of putting disclaimers on some of Rogan's videos, but the White House is encouraging "every platform to continue doing more..."  Sure, those disclaimers are nice and all, but we think you should be doing more.  If platforms take down content after being encouraged by government, would that qualify as censorship?  I think it would.

The Coming Chinese Famine?

When the good times were rolling in the real estate market in China, the government often displaced farmers in order to give the land to developers.  Many of the ghost cities have been built upon once arable land.  The amount of arable land in China has shrunk dramatically in recent years.  For a country with 1.4 billion people to feed, maintaining farmland seems like a sensible idea.  With approximately 4x the population of the United States, it has less arable land.  China is a food importer and has been stock piling food recently.  China has almost 70% of the world's corn reserves, 60% of the rice, and 51% of the wheat.  China has ad campaigns about cleaning your plate and has banned food channels on social media that waste food.  Recent massive flooding has not been good for the harvest.  Well, government numbers show it is great, but who trusts such news from China?

ADVChina discussed this topic recently as well.  In their travels throughout China, Winston and Matthew went to some rice fields and found reckless use of pesticides.  In the upcoming Olympics, athletes have been warned not to eat local food as it could result in a failed drug test.  Ground water contamination is extremely bad (80 to 90%, depending on rural or urban).  Those with money have their food imported.

China has suffered a disastrous famine in living memory.  The Great Chinese Famine (1959-61) saw anywhere from 15 million to 55 million die of starvation.  This was not a matter of bad weather.  It was Mao Zedong's implementation of the Great Leap Forward, which included a variety of destructive policies.  One of the most noteworthy was the successful effort to kill birds, presuming that birds had a large impact on grain harvest.  Indeed they did, but in the opposite way predicted.  When the birds were exterminated, the locust populations - which birds eat - thrived and devoured the harvests.  Many Chinese were told to make iron and steel rather than farm.  And then there were the farming techniques imported from Russia, which only a couple decades earlier had starved 4 to 7 million Ukrainians in the Holodomor.

That the Chinese government might once again inflict a famine on its population through bad policies is not hard to believe.

Bizarre Gender Bias

I came across an unusual article today about pareidolia, which is a tendency to perceive images in random patterns.  One might see a face on the electrical outlet or in a vague pattern of stucco on a wall.  The reports of patterns of Jesus or the Virgin Mary are legion.  The article in question specifically addressed face pareidolia.  The funny thing was that the vast majority of the faces were identified as male.  The researchers could not determine why that was.  However, there was also a tendency to see young faces rather than old ones.  As far as the emotion of the face, it was more often happy than anything else.

Quick read and most entertaining.  Check it out.