Nobel Peace Prize Presidents

The Nobel Peace Prize was first awarded in 1901.  It was to be given "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses."  Since then, 4 American Presidents have won the Nobel Peace Prize.

Theodore Roosevelt (1906): The president who called for speaking softly and carrying a big stick held a peace conference to end the Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905).  Despite his jingoist reputation - or more likely because of it, Roosevelt had no wars during his presidency and managed to quell one in which the US was not a participant.  He is the only Republican president to win the Nobel Peace Prize.

Woodrow Wilson (1919): The president who "kept us out of the war" until he was safely re-elected won the peace prize for his role in founding the League of Nations.  Though he had been its leading proponent, he was unable to convince the US Senate to ratify membership.  Thus, the US didn't join.  The US did join the League's successor, the United Nations.  Secretary of State Cordell Hull won the 1945 Peace Prize for that.

Jimmy Carter (2002): Though he won it long after his presidency ended, his peace prize recognized his years of work as a peacemaker.  Of particular note, the Camp David Accords, which led to a peace deal between Israel and Egypt, were hosted by President Carter during his presidency, very like the peace conference Roosevelt had hosted in 1905.  The 1978 Peace Prize was awarded to Menachem Begin of Israel and Anwar Sadat of Egypt.  The oversight of Carter's role was rectified in 2002.

Barack Obama (2009): President Obama was awarded the peace prize only 9 months into his administration "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples."  Whereas the other three presidents had clear accomplishments in pursuit of peace, Obama had only aspirational speeches. At the time, this looked to be an award for things to come. Even Obama himself was astonished and suggested that it was not "a recognition of my own accomplishments but rather an affirmation of American leadership on behalf of aspirations held by people in all nations."

In recent decades, the Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded arbitrarily.  The parameters for the award are clear: 

to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.

This is an award for diplomats, disarmament proponents, and peaceniks.  Former VP Al Gore won in 2007 for his film about climate change.  The 2011 peace prize was awarded to those struggling for women's rights in Liberia and Yemen.  The 2014 peace prize recognized efforts to educate young people in India and Pakistan.  Yes, these are laudable goals, but do they best represent the stated intent of the award.  I don't think so.

Noble House (1988)

Alastair Struan (Denholm Elliott) has called a midnight meeting at the HQ of the Struan & Company, the leading trading company in Hong Kong.  There are only 4 attendees: his nephew, Ian Dunross (Pierce Brosnan), Philip Chen (Burt Kwouk), and Chen's son, John.  The company is in crisis and Alastair has opted to transfer leadership to Ian.  The name for the CEO is Tai Pan.  Dunross's first act is to fire Alastair from the traditional position of a former Tai Pan.  Minutes later, the folly of his predecessor's leadership is exposed and Ian must make the company public to keep it afloat.

Three years later, Struan & Co are once again treading water.  Dunross has looked overseas for a foreign investor and found Par Con Industries, which is run by Lincoln "Linc" Bartlett (Ben Masters).  Bartlett is a corporate raider who intends to take over Struan & Co, then sell it for a huge profit.  He has secretly hired John Chen as an inside source which gives him an unusually strong bargaining position.  Moreover, after a meet & greet with Dunross, Linc confers with Struan's chief rival, Rothwell-Gornt.  Rothwell-Gornt is run by Quillan Gornt (John Rhys-Davies), who proves to have a Hatfield vs. McCoy relationship with Ian Dunross and his ancestors.  Of note, this is a sequel to Tai Pan, which took place 150 years earlier and is frequently referenced in dialogue regarding the family history.  Maybe I should have watched that movie first.

Though the ostensible plot follows the wheeling and dealing of these titans of industry, the story is really about the love lives of Ian Dunross and Linc Bartlett.  Dunross and Par Con VP Casey Tcholok (Deborah Raffin) are instantly attracted to each other and it quickly escalates, but not without the usual soap operatic bumps of being business rivals.  Then there is Linc and Quillan Gornt's former mistress, Orlanda Ramos (Julia Nickson).  Though Linc knows that Quillan has arranged the tryst, he nonetheless falls for Orlanda.  Of course, she falls for him too.

The story takes place over a week or so, but it is an eventful week.  There is a building fire that nearly kills our heroes, a kidnapping, building collapse, an attempted rape, an international incident, drug dealing blackmailers, and more.  Who knew that Hong Kong was so exciting?

This four-part miniseries has a great setting but is mediocre in execution.  Brosnan is a grim character.  Fresh from his affable and charming role as Remington Steele, here he is a humorless tactician, a man who has allowed his problems to grind him down but never defeat him.  He has no friends, only potential allies for his latest gambit to keep Struan & Co. in business.  Like in the Fourth Protocol, his charm and personality has been stripped away to leave a mostly unappealing character.  By contrast, John Rhys-Davies is having a blast as the villain.  He's nasty but fun, often laughing and smiling as he twists the knife.  Ben Masters is on the one-hand a conniving businessman who fits in the corporate raider mold of Gordon Gecko, but then has this sappy romance with Orlanda.  It is a difficult fit.

Overall, it is mediocre.  Pierce Brosnan and Julia Nickson would start together the following year in another miniseries: Around the World in 80 Days.  That's a better miniseries.  Watch that one instead.

The Mormon Battalion

In 1846, the United States went to war with Mexico.  President Polk brushed off his plans for how the war should go.  One of his plans was to dispatch General Stephen Watts Kearney to secure New Mexico and California.  While he was arranging this, he met Mr. Jesse Little.  Little was a Mormon who looked for governmental assistance for the Mormon migration to the Great Salt Lake.  This was timely.  Polk needed more Americans headed west just then and proposed that the Mormons raise a battalion to join the Army of the West under Kearney.  Little eagerly agreed and set out for Iowa, where the Mormons were currently encamped.  Soon thereafter, James Allen of the First Dragoons met with Brigham Young to discuss the details.  Five companies - approximately 500 men - were recruited and set out for Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.

As with most volunteer units, the Mormons elected their officers from among them.  Of course, Colonel Allen remained as the overall commander.  He had several other US Army officers as part of his staff, notably Lt. AJ Smith and Lt. Stoneman.  Allen's death at Fort Leavenworth left command of the battalion in confusion.  Captain Jefferson Hunt of Company A was now the highest-ranking officer.  Lt. Smith noted that he was still only a volunteer with no real rank in the US military, which meant Smith was in command.  The various officers didn't much like that reasoning, but Smith got his way on account of being able to control government funds.  He was not a popular commander.

The battalion commenced its march on August 12, 1846.  They arrived in Santa Fe, New Mexico between October 9th and October 12.  The city had already been captured by Kearney and was currently governed by Colonel Doniphan of the First Missouri Mounted Volunteers.  News returned from General Kearney that Colonel Philip St. George Cooke would take command of the battalion as it blazed a wagon road to California.  Cooke found many of the recruits to be in poor condition and mustered them out of service.  The remaining troops began the grueling trek across the southwestern desert.

As the men had sent their clothing allowance back to Iowa to aid in the support of their families, the men only had the clothes in which they arrived.  After so long a march, their clothes - especially footwear - were in poor condition.  Soldiers fashioned makeshift shoes out of hides and otherwise unwearable clothing.  Thirst and hunger were constant companions and the labor was intense.  At times, the men had to help the mules drag wagons through deep sands and at other times they had to hew a path through a rocky canyon.

On the 27th of January, the Mormon Battalion spotted the Pacific Ocean near what is now Oceanside.  The battle for California was already won.  The Battalion found itself on garrison duty until the end of their enlistment.  The men had enlisted for 1 year.  When that year was up, the governor and General Kearney urged them to re-enlist.  The Mormons had been exemplary soldiers.  However, fewer than 100 chose to enlist for another year.  Most of the rest set out for Salt Lake City.  Many found themselves in what would soon be the gold fields of California.

BH Roberts was a prolific writer on Mormon topics.  He addressed the Mormon Battalion in this 1919 book.  It is a quick read that hits the highlights without going into much depth.  An excellent summary that provides a good overview of the Mormon Battalion and its service in the Mexican-American War.  Recommended.

Pardon Me

The power to pardon has been in the Constitution from the beginning.  George Washington issued 16 pardons during his 2 terms in office.  Only William Henry Harrison and James Garfield issued fewer pardons.  In fact, they each issued none on account of dying early in their presidencies.  John Adams, the sole Federalist president, only issued 20.  The power of the pardon has grown since then.  Let's see how that breaks down by party.

Independent

Washington didn't like the party system though he most aligned with the Federalist Party.  However, he spoke against parties so he's generally classified as Independent.  He offered 16 pardons.  John Tyler, the 10th President, was originally a Democrat but switched to Whig.  When he took over for William Henry Harrison, the Whigs disowned him and the Democrats didn't want him.  Thus, he falls into the Independent Party.  He offered 209 pardons.  Tyler lifted the average per president quite a bit.

Federalist

There was only 1 Federalist, President John Adams.  Following Washington, he was stingy with the pardons, only granting 20 in his 4 years as president.

Democratic-Republican

The Party of Thomas Jefferson, it primarily competed with the Federalist until they disintegrated after the War of 1812.  Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, and John Quincy Adams were Democratic-Republicans.  The party was much more generous with pardons, offering 917.

Democratic

Having lost the 1824 election, Andrew Jackson split from the Democratic-Republicans to create a new party.  This is the Democratic Party that continues to this day.  It is the most generous with pardons, averaging 1,489 per president.  This number does not include Andrew Johnson's blanket pardon for many Confederates after the Civil War or Jimmy Carter's blanket pardon to over 200,000 draft dodgers after Vietnam.  Franklin Pierce was the stingiest with pardons (142), while Joe Biden has more than doubled 2nd place FDR (3,687) with 8,027 pardons so far.

Of particular note, Joe Biden has dramatically lifted the average.  Removing Joe Biden's 8,027 pardons, drops the Democratic average to 1,053 per Democratic president.  How high will it go by January 20th?

This reminds me of Al Gore's hockey stick graph.

Whig

There were only 3 Whig Presidents and two of them died early in their presidencies.  The Whigs only issued 208 pardons.

Republican

The Party of Lincoln has had more presidents than its nearest rival, the Democrats.  A Republican president averages 701 pardons.  Calvin Coolidge offered the most pardons (1,545) of any Republican while George HW Bush offered the fewest (77), if we excluded James Garfield, who issued none before his assassination.

From Eisenhower to Trump (1953 to 2021), there were 8,126 pardons.  President Biden is going for the Guinness Book of World Records.

Three Time Nominee

Generally speaking, politicians only win the nomination for president one or two times.  Parties normally only nominate the politician for a 2nd time if he is the incumbent.  To take examples from recent years, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George Bush, Bill Clinton, George W Bush, Barack Obama, and Donald Trump were each nominated for 2nd terms while Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis, Bob Dole, Al Gore, John Kerry, John McCain, Mitt Romney, and Hillary Clinton were not renominated.  The winners get a second shot while the losers are usually tossed aside.  Of course, there are exceptions.  Sometimes the loser is given a second chance.  For instance, Adlai Stevenson lost to Eisenhower in 1952, but was nominated again in 1956; he lost again.  In a couple of cases, there have been three-time losers: both Henry Clay & William Jennings Bryan were nominees in 3 separate elections.

Looking only at men who served as president, how many of them were nominated on three separate occasions?

Thomas Jefferson was the Democratic-Republican nominee for president in 1796, 1800, and 1804.  He came in second place in 1796, which secured him the vice presidency.  He won the presidency in 1800 and was nominated for re-election in 1804.

Andrew Jackson was one of four Democratic-Republican nominees in 1824.  Though he won the plurality of electoral votes and popular vote, he lost to John Quincy Adams in the contingent election.  He was the Democratic nominee (the Democratic-Republican party had split into factions after the 1824 debacle) in both 1828 and 1832.

Martin Van Buren was Andrew Jackson's chosen successor.  He won in 1836 and was renominated in 1840.  Though he lost in 1840, he became the Free-Soil Party candidate in 1848, marking his 3rd time running in the general election.

Grover Cleveland ran for office in 1884 and won.  However, when he ran for re-election in 1888, he lost to Benjamin Harrison.  He secured the Democratic nomination again in 1892 and won.  He was the first president to serve non-consecutive terms.

Richard Nixon ran for president in 1960.  He lost to JFK.  However, he managed to win the nomination again in 1968 and went on to win the presidency.  He won re-election in 1972, though he didn't finish his term.

Donald Trump duplicated Grover Cleveland's feat.  He won in 2016, lost his 2020 re-election bid, but then came back to win in 2024.

Of this group, Jefferson, Jackson, Cleveland, and Trump were nominees in three consecutive elections.

Truncated Presidential Terms

A full term for a US President is 4 years, which is 1,461 days.  Most presidents who did not reach the 1,461 days died in office, resigned, or had been elevated from the vice presidency to fill a vacancy.  However, there are four exceptions, presidents who served a full term and yet it was less than 1,461 days.  How does that work?

George Washington wasn't inaugurated until April 30, 1789.  As the new government was just getting started, Washington wasn't elected until April 6th.  He didn't leave Mt. Vernon until April 16 and was inaugurated upon arriving in New York City.  His first full term was 1,404 days.

John Adams served from March 4, 1797 to March 4, 1801.  Thanks to the absence of a leap day in 1800, his time in office was only 1,460 days.  Leap days don't occur in years divisible by 100 unless it is divisible by 400.  Thus, 2000 had a leap day for Bill Clinton's second term, but 1800 didn't for John Adams.

William McKinley's first term started on March 4, 1897 and ended on March 4, 1901.  Just like Adams, his term was missing a leap day in 1900.  Unlike Adams, he was reelected.  He was assassinated 6 months into his second term.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt served for 3 full terms and began a 4th when he died.  The 20th Amendment had been ratified shortly before his inauguration in 1933.  The amendment changed inauguration day from March 4 to January 20.  FDR's first term began on March 4, 1933, but ended on January 20, 1937.  This proved to be only 1,418 days.

Of note, both John Tyler (1841-1845) and Andrew Johnson (1865-1869) had longer partial terms than either Washington or Roosevelt's full terms.  Tyler took over after William Henry Harrison died only 1 month into office.  That left 1,430 days for Tyler's partial term.  Johnson became president after Lincoln's assassination and served 1,419 days.

Presidents and the Supreme Court

Which president selected the most Supreme Court justices?  It should come as no surprise that President Washington, being the first President, had the opportunity to select every justice on the original court.  However, he only just surpassed another president.  Let's see which presidents had the most judicial picks and those with the fewest.

There have been 116 justices, 17 of whom were Chief Justices.  It is worth noting that the Court began with only 6 justices, before expanding to 7, 9, 10, and then shrinking to the current 9.

Four presidents did not select any justices.  William Henry Harrison (9) died only 1 month into office.  Zachary Taylor (12) died 16 months into office.  The Congress changed the law in order to prevent Andrew Johnson (17) from having an opportunity to select a justice.  Of note, the Court had 10 justices at the time and was slated to shrink to 7.  With Johnson's departure, the Court was restored to 9 justices.  Lastly, Jimmy Carter (39) didn't get to select a justice.

James Monroe (5), John Quincy Adams (6), John Tyler (10), Millard Fillmore (13), Franklin Pierce (14), James Buchanan (15), James Garfield (20), William McKinley (25), Calvin Coolidge (30), Gerald Ford (38), and Joe Biden (46) each selected one justice for the Court.

James Madison (4), Martin Van Buren (8), James K Polk (11), Rutherford B Hayes (19), Chester Arthur (21), JFK (35), LBJ (36), George HW Bush (41), Bill Clinton (42), George W Bush (43), and Barack Obama (44) each selected 2 new justices to the Court.  However, George W Bush had the opportunity to select the 17th Chief Justice, John Roberts.

John Adams (2), Thomas Jefferson (3), Theodore Roosevelt (26), Woodrow Wilson (28), Herbert Hoover (31), and Donald Trump (45) selected three each.  John Adams chose the longest-serving Chief Justice, John Marshall.  Of note, Marshall was the 4th Chief Justice despite being chosen by only the 2nd president.  Hoover selected Charles Evans Hughes for Chief Justice; Hughes had been an associate justice and was Chief Justice William Howard Taft's chosen successor.

Ulysses Grant (18), Grover Cleveland (22 & 24), Benjamin Harrison (23), Warren Harding (29), Harry Truman (33), Richard Nixon (37), and Ronald Regan (40) selected 4 justices for the Court.  Most of these presidents also selected a new Chief Justice among the four picks.  Grant chose Marrison Waite, Cleveland selected Melville Fuller, Harding installed former President William Howard Taft, Truman picked Fred Vinson, Nixon chose Warren Burger, and Reagan elevated William Rehnquist (Rehnquist had been one of Nixon's Associate Justice picks).

Abraham Lincoln (16) and Dwight Eisenhower (34) each had 5 Court picks.  Lincoln chose Salmon Chase as the Chief Justice.  Eisenhower selected Earl Warren to be Chief Justice.

Andrew Jackson (7) and William Howard Taft (27) selected 6 justices for the Court.  Jackson replaced John Marshall with Roger Taney, the Chief Justice who is forever stained with the Dredd Scott decision.  Taft, who would later be appointed Chief Justice, elevated Edward D White to be Chief Justice.  He would replace White only a decade later.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt (32) chose 9 justices during his three terms as president.  He elevated Harlan F Stone, an associate justice, to be the Chief Justice.

George Washington (1) selected 10 justices for the Court.  Though there were only 6 justices at the time, the turnover was higher.  In these early days, the Court didn't possess the prestige or power that it would gain in later years.  For the first Chief Justice, he chose John Jay.  Jay stayed in the position for 5 years before resigning to run for governor of New York (he won).  Washington next chose John Rutledge.  Rutledge had been rejected for associate justice by the Senate in 1789 and, when the Senate was again in session, he was rejected for Chief Justice as well.  He served about 5 months as Chief Justice.  Thus, Washington chose the 3rd Chief Justice, Oliver Ellsworth.

Send in the Rookies!

Much has been said about Trump selecting people with insufficient experience, especially from those who have buckets of experience (I'm looking at you, John Bolton).  However, look at what we are getting for our hyper-experienced government employees: disaster.  I am reminded of a quote from William F Buckley: 

I would rather be governed by the first 2,000 people in the telephone directory, than by the Harvard University faculty.

Experience in government is bad.  The longer people are in government, the more corrupt they will be.  It is not by accident that people with 6-figure salary soon have an 8-figure net worth.  When trillions of dollars are sloshing around, it is very hard to resist appropriating some.  Shrinking government would be a great first step, but only noobs can do that.  After a few years, only the most ethical of people can avoid being corrupted.  Ron Paul managed to stay true to his limited government principles even after 20 years in the House.

During his first term, President Trump tinkered with the Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act, which gave us bureaucrats outside the purview of the president.  The spoils system - which saw the president sweep all the offices and give them to supporters - was in poor regard.  Yeah, that's hardly a surprise.  The Pendleton Act took most offices out of the president's hands, effectively making them unresponsive to executive control.  Spoils was bad, but this has proven worse.

Maybe Javier Milei's chainsaw is available.  We have vastly more deadwood to trim than Argentina.

The Anderson Tapes (1971)

Robert "Duke" Anderson (Sean Connery) is released from prison after a 10-year sentence.  His first order of business is to hookup with his old flame, Ingrid (Dyan Cannon).  She happens to be living in an upscale building, thanks to her sugar daddy, Werner (Richard Shull).  The wealth on display get Duke's larcenous desires sparking and he starts planning a heist.  He will need help, including funding and manpower.  He checks in with local mob boss, Pat Angelo (Alan King).  Of course, Angelo is under surveillance and everything that he and Duke discuss is recorded.  Then Duke checks in with the Kid (Christopher Walken), a youth who was released from prison the same day as him.  The Kid was in for drugs and is under surveillance, so everything Duke says to him is recorded.  This repeats with each new recruit, though a different law enforcement agency is recording.  In one case, a private eye is doing the recording.  All the pieces of the planned heist have been revealed but no one sees the whole picture.  The caper launches with the police in the dark.

The story is told in a non-linear fashion.  The various residents of the apartment complex are being interviewed on site as the police carry away bodies on stretchers or attend wounds to the tenants.  Clearly, something went seriously wrong with the heist, but what?  Were the police in the know?  Had they been lying in wait?  How many of Duke's men escaped?

The movie is a commentary on the surveillance state that the US had become but also the uselessness of that surveillance.  Indeed, even today it always turns out that the various law enforcement agencies - most notably the FBI - have a file on the latest mass shooter or bomber.  Is Lumet arguing that surveillance does not help prevent crimes?  Maybe.

This was Christopher Walken's first big screen role.  The halting cadence that is frequently used to mimic him is absent here.  Where this was Walken's first movie, it proved to be Margaret Hamilton's last.  She plays one of the tenants here though she is most remembered as the Wicked Witch in The Wizard of Oz (1939).  Also of note, Garrett Morris plays a cop.  This predates his debut as one of the original SNL cast members in 1975.  When I first saw this movie, I expected him to be comic relief rather than a police commando.

This is one of 5 collaborations between Sean Connery and Sidney Lumet.  The first was The Hill (1965), which is the best of the bunch.  Next was The Offence (1973), which is a bleak, dark film.  Then Murder on the Orient Express (1974), where Connery has a small role, and lastly Family Business (1989), which was mediocre.

Just okay.

Borderline (1980)

Jeb Maynard (Charles Bronson) is the head honcho of the La Mesa office of the US Border Patrol.  Illegal crossings have gone way up recently so Jeb sent to Washington for more help - maybe a dozen men; instead, only Jimmy Fante (Bruno Kirby) has been sent.  That night, Jeb takes Jimmy - affectionately nicknamed "the kid" - with him on a border sweep.  Meanwhile, veteran Scooter Jackson (Wilford Brimley) will patrol the highway for suspicious vehicles.  The uptick in crossings can be linked to a new coyote, El Marino (Ed Harris), a Vietnam veteran who has useful skills for smuggling people into the United States.  He is also willing to up the stakes, since he carries firearms.

The story follows Jeb's efforts to find the murderer of one of his border agents and break up a major smuggling ring.  Though the murder officially falls under FBI jurisdiction, they think it is drug-related.  Yeah, even in 1980, the FBI was incompetent.  Jeb has to use boot prints, tomatoes, tire tracks, and an illegal alien to track the murderers.

This was Ed Harris' first big movie role.  He brings his standard intensity to the role, making El Marino an intimidating adversary.

Despite being a 44-year-old movie, it demonstrates how the southern border is a longstanding problem that remains unresolved.  In the movie, it is suggested that illegals are actively imported by big business as cheap labor.  Amazingly, the big businessman behind the scheme (Michael Lerner) is found not guilty in court; he gets away with it though his underlings go to jail.  Of note, there was a lot of cooperation with and input from the US Border Patrol during the making of the film.

Just okay.

The Naked Face (1984)

Dr. Judd Stevens (Roger Moore) is a psychoanalyst in Chicago who has recently been widowed.  As such, his life is consumed by his work and meals at home alone.  Then, one of his patients is murdered.  Curiously, the patient was wearing Dr. Stevens' raincoat when he was stabbed to death.  Lt. McGreavy (Rod Steiger) and Detective Angeli (Elliott Gould) arrive to investigate.  McGreavy almost instantly suspects Stevens as the murderer.  Throughout the investigation, he is hostile to Stevens.  When more people in Dr. Stevens orbit die, Judd starts investigating on his own with the help of Private Investigator Morgens (Art Carney).  Judd believes he is the true target.

Filmed before Moore's final outing as James Bond in A View to a Kill (1985), this is an unusual role for him.  He is neither a lady's man nor a man of action.  When danger approaches, he runs away and hides in the backroom.  When fisticuffs are required, he gets beaten to a pulp.  When his brother-in-law, Dr. Peter Hadley (David Hedison), urges him to date, he begs off.  He's practically a shut-in.

Rod Stieger and Elliott Gould run the good cop - bad cop routine, Stieger being bad cop.  McGreavy's previous partner was killed by a psychopath some years earlier and Dr. Stevens' testimony was decisive for a successful insanity defense.  That explains McGreavy's hostility.  The usually wisecracking Gould has no personality here.  He is a bland character who serves as a whipping post for McGreavy's frustration or a sympathetic ear to Stevens' complaints about McGreavy.  The script does Gould no favors; it could have been a much better role.

Though it proved to be a small role, Art Carney is great as the private eye.  Of course, the haggard and world-weary private eye was his go-to role for some time (e.g. Sunburn, The Late Show).  Where Gould is bland and forgettable, Carney shines in his scenes.

Overall, it is just okay.  The cast is far better than the script.  There are not enough patients to make it a mystery as to which one is the source of Dr. Stevens troubles.  Ann Blake (Anne Archer) is a headliner among a bunch of unknown character actors.  Gee, what could this mean?  However, the ending did come as a surprise.

The Blanket Pardon

Despite promises to the contrary, President Biden has pardoned his son for all crimes - whether convicted, charged, or even suspected - from 2014 through today, December 1, 2024.  Wow, we didn't see that coming at all.  What a huge surprise.  Sure, every political pundit predicted exactly this would happen, but otherwise this comes out of the blue.  Yes, with all the Trump cases dropping away, there is no longer any need to appear 'unbiased' and 'evenhanded' regarding justice.  Nope, now there is no political cost to President Biden for pardoning his son.  Yeah, it may look bad in the history books, but family is family.

Now the real fun begins.  Soon, there will be stories in the media why this was the right thing to do, a noble thing to do, and mostly Trump's and/or Republicans' fault.  Karine Jean-Pierre, White House press secretary, is going to have a stressful day tomorrow.  Good luck.

Elisha Kane, Arctic Explorer

During the Mexican-American War, Albert Brackett was a lieutenant in an Indiana Volunteer regiment under the command of General Joseph Lane.  In December of 1847, while garrisoned in Puebla, Bracket met Dr. Elisha Kane of the US Navy.  Kane had been escorted by the Spy Battalion (Mexicans who fought for the US and were used to counter the guerrillas that lurked along the national highway) and even found himself in a confrontation with guerrillas.  While Colonel Dominguez, leader of the Spy Battalion, wanted to shoot the captured guerrillas, Kane convinced him to turn them over to the regular army in Puebla.  In addition to saving them from being shot, Dr. Kane saved the life of one of the injured captives.  Interesting, but why does Brackett make a point of mentioning a random courier who passed through Puebla?  By the time Brackett wrote his memoir, Kane was famous.

Elisha Kane graduated from the University of Pennsylvania Medical School in 1842 and joined the US Navy the following year as an assistant surgeon.  He sailed the world aboard the USS Brandywine, having a variety of adventures but nothing to earn him fame.  Not long after his return to the US, he requested that Secretary of State James Buchanan send him as an envoy to Mexico City during the war.  Thus, in the Fall of 1847, he was dispatched with a message to General Winfield Scott.

After the war, he was back to regular naval service.  Of course, the issue of the time was what happened to Sir John Franklin's expedition in the Arctic?  Lady Jane Franklin had appealed to President Zachary Taylor to help find her missing husband.  However, the US Congress was clearly not keen on buying ships for such a task.  In stepped Henry Grinnell, a successful American merchant.  He purchased two brigs - the Rescue and the Advance - and loaned them to the US government.  Elisha Kane was the chief medical officer of the expedition.  On this first expedition, the graves of three of Sir John's crewmen were discovered, but no more.

Upon his return, Kane spoke about his arctic travels to many groups and eventually wrote a book about the Grinnell Expedition.  In 1853, Grinnell funded a second expedition and Kane was given command of the USS Advance.  This time, he pressed further north, providing a path for future explorers to reach the north pole.  He returned in October of 1855, still having failed to find Sir John Franklin.  Even so, he was hailed as a hero.  He traveled to England to report his failure to find Sir John to Lady Jane Franklin.

Kane had never had the best constitution.  He had originally set out to be a civil engineer, but his health argued against it.  Thus, he switched to medical school.  Despite his physical ailments, he again pursued an active career.  He had contracted coast fever (probably malaria) in Africa during his time on the Brandywine, forcing him to return to the US to recover.  After the 2nd Grinnell Expedition, his health was once again failing.  He went to Havana to recover.  He died there in February 1857.  He was only 37.

The Terror (2018)

In 1850, Captain Sir James Ross treks into the frozen Artic to locate a missing expedition.  The Eskimo says that he did encounter a dying Englishman.  Ross provides pictures of the various officers and the Eskimo points to Captain Francis Crozier (Jared Harris).

In 1845, Captain Sir John Franklin (Ciaran Hinds) was given command of the HMS Terror and the HMS Erebus to map the Northwest Passage.  He was aided in this by Captain Crozier and Commander James Fitzjames (Tobias Menzies).  The ships had particularly thick hulls to protect against ice and also possessed steam-powered engines to both drive the propellor and provide warmth to the ship.  In September of 1846, the ships get stuck in the ice and have to wait for the summer thaw to sail further.  The thaw never comes.  Instead, they are beset by an Inuit spirit beast that takes the form of a deformed polar bear.  In addition to the bear, the crew suffer from lead poisoned food, scurvy, and a growing threat of mutiny.

This 10-episode series follows the fate of the lost expedition as well as the efforts of Sir John's wife, Jane Franklin (Greta Scacchi) to send a rescue mission.  The series ends where it began, in the tent with Sir James Ross discussing the fate of the crew.

The setting is excellent and the characters well-realized.  The British stiff upper lip and never say die mentality shines through.  If the number of problems had been reduced by one, Crozier would likely have brought most of the men back to civilization.  It hardly matters which one, but there is definitely the straw that broke the camel's back here.

Recommended.

Bruno Leoni

On a recent EconTalk, Michael Munger discussed the underrated economist, Bruno Leoni.  Leoni held that law should emerge in a manner similar to a market.  The current system of topdown legislation is just as backwards as central planning for an economy.  As an example, Munger suggested that rather than paving paths between buildings on a college campus, builders should wait a year and see where the muddy paths emerge.  That is where you pave.  Of course, we have all seen cases where the builders paved first only to find trails blazed through the grass thereafter.  By this system, law would emerge through judicial rulings: case law.  I have long disliked case law as creating bad precedents (e.g. Plessy v. Ferguson, Rowe v. Wade, etc.), but those eventually fell away by the same process that brought them into being.  Could this be a reasonable means of enacting law?

Bruno Leoni was an Italian economist who was unfortunately murdered at the age of 54.  However, such economists as James Buchanan and Friedrich Hayek - both Nobel Prize winners - credit Leoni for influencing their work.  Had Leoni lived longer, his works might be as well-known as theirs.

The idea of law emerging like a market seems backwards, but it does harken back to how it was done in earlier days.  There was a time when people would bring their disputes to the ruler and ask him to decide.  His decision became law.  As societies grew larger, this method became impractical.  Or did it?  Let the law emerge through judicial rulings.  Other judges may adopt the reasoning of a deciding judge or overrule it.  Over time, those muddy paths that persist will be paved while those that don't will see the grass return.

Seeing where legislatures have brought us, it looks like Leoni has a point.  A legislator is there to legislate.  That we already have far too many laws is beside the point.  If you are a hammer, all you see is nails.  If you are a legislator, you need to make laws.  It might be that the US had hit the perfect number and balance of laws in 1972 and everything since has just been busywork for bored lawmakers.  On the other hand, a judge exists to rule on the law.  The judge could give the same ruling scores of times, further paving that well-tread path.  The judge only needs to rule on those issues that are presented in court by plaintiffs, not write law suggested by lobbyists.  Leoni is onto something here.

Outstanding episode and highly recommended.

Rogue Elements (2024)

In Estonia, a CIA team attempts to extract an informant.  The operation is compromised, and the team is either killed or captured.  Volkov, who is in charge of the Russian forces, suddenly finds himself targeted by an unseen sniper.  He escapes though not all of his men survive.  A video showing the interrogation and execution of the captured CIA agents was sent to Langley.  Volkov was most interested in discovering who rescued Maras from a Siberian prison; Ryan Drake's name was offered.  The CIA director is not happy.  Ryan Drake is sent to recover the informant, which will probably end up being a trap.  His teammates are less than eager.  Drake and Frost - who is the computer whiz of the group - infiltrate the warehouse while Deitrich - who is fluent in Russian - provides a distraction at the front gate.  Things go mostly smoothly until Frost realized there are Rogue Elements involved.  The mysterious sniper from the opening returns to finish the job.

The story takes place sometime after the events in Redemption.  Anya, AKA Maras, was tortured by Volkov and she intends to settle that score.  She owes Drake a debt for her extraction but she's not going to let him get in the way of her vengeance.

Drake and his team come across as only moderately competent.  The same is true of the Russians.  The original CIA team was clearly incompetent to have been so easily surprised and taken down.  Even Anya, who has the most experience, makes some boneheaded blunders.  Most surprising was how the female characters repeatedly stood toe to toe with larger men while brawling.  Sorry, not going to happen.  The idea of Frost holding the knife away from her neck while a man twice her size is shoving down with his weight is just unbelievable.  Clearly, the makers knew that which is why the villain says, "I'm not even trying."  Yeah, okay.

In his Critical Drinker persona, I doubt Will Jordon would speak favorably of this.  It's a run-of-the-mill espionage story with a predictable plot and uninspiring characters.  Given the time constraints - it is only 40 minutes, there isn't much room to develop the characters or have an intricate plot.  Of course, this is basically a pilot, an effort to get something more going for his Drake series (9 books so far).  I would watch episode 2, which makes this a success.

When the States Joined

One accomplishment that is usually listed under the record of a president is the states that were added during his term.  The last state added, Hawaii, was during the Eisenhower Administration.  Which president oversaw the most states added to the Union?  Surely, Washington would be the obvious guess.  But that would be incorrect!  Let's have a look from the least to the most.

ZERO STATES

John Adams, John Quincy Adams, Martin Van Buren, William Henry Harrison, Zachary Taylor, Franklin Pierce, Rutherford Hayes, James Garfield, Chester Arthur, William McKinley, Woodrow Wilson, Warren G Harding, Calvin Coolidge, Herbert Hoover, FDR, and Harry Truman added no states during their tenure.  Of course, anyone after Eisenhower is clearly in the zero states camp as well.  That would be JFK, LBJ, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George Bush, Bill Clinton, George W Bush, Barack Obama, Donald Trump, and Joe Biden.  

ONE STATE

- Thomas Jefferson added Ohio, the 17th State, in 1803.

- John Tyler added Florida, the 27th State, on March 3, 1845.  He left the Presidency the following day.

- Millard Fillmore added California, the 31st State, in 1850.

- Andrew Johnson added Nebraska, the 37th State, in 1867.

- Ulysses Grant added Colorado, the 38th State, 1876.

- Grover Cleveland added Utah, the 45th State, in 1896.  This happened in his second term, which is noteworthy because it was not consecutive with his first.

- Theodore Roosevelt added Oklahoma, the 46th State in 1907.

TWO STATES

- James Madison added Louisiana (18th) in 1812 and Indiana (19th) in 1816.

- Andrew Jackson added Arkansas (25th) in 1836 and Michigan (26th) in 1837.

- Abraham Lincoln added West Virginia (35th) in 1863 and Nevada (36th) in 1864.  It is noteworthy that West Virginia had been part of Virginia and chose to breakaway as a new state to join the Union.  Of course, Lincoln also lost a number of states but that's a topic for another blog.

- William Howard Taft added New Mexico (47th) and Arizona (48th), both in 1912.

- Dwight Eisenhower added Alaska (49th) and Hawaii (50th) in 1959.

THREE STATES

- James K Polk added Texas (28th) in 1845, Iowa (29th) in 1846, and Wisconsin (30th) in 1848.

- James Buchanan added Minnesota (32nd) in 1858, Oregon (33rd) in 1859, and Kansas (34th) in 1861.  Interestingly, he added Kansas after South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, and Louisiana had already seceded.

FIVE STATES

- George Washington added North Carlonia (12th) in 1789, Rhode Island (13th) in 1790, Vermont (14th) in 1791, Kentucky (15th) in 1792, and Tennessee (16th) in 1796.  The first eleven states - Delaware (1), Pennsylvania (2), New Jersey (3), Georgia (4), Connecticut (5), Massachusetts (6), Maryland (7), South Carolina (8), New Hampshire (9), Virginia (10), and New York (11) - had already been recognized as part of the country by ratifying the Constitution.  This happened before Washington was president.

- James Monroe added Mississippi (20th) in 1817, Illinois (21st) in 1818, Alabama (22nd) in 1819, Maine (23rd) in 1820, and Missouri (24th) in 1821.

SIX STATES

- Benjamin Harrison added North Dakota (39th), South Dakota (40th), Montana (41st), and Washington (42nd), all in the first two weeks of November in 1889.  Idaho (43rd) and Wyoming (44th) were added in July of 1890.  In a little more than 8 months, Harrison added 6 states.  It is also noteworthy that the US Census of 1890, which took place during Harrison's only term, declared an end to the American Frontier; the West was settled.

Maybe the Parties Did Flip?

Recently, someone noted that Trump, RFK Jr., Tulsi Gabbard, and Elon Musk all used to be Democrats.  In fact, Ronald Reagan had been a Democrat in his younger days.  Reagan often said that the party left him rather than he left the party. Tulsi had run for president as a Democrat during the 2020 primaries, but she soon broke with her party on topics such as LGBTQ, the border, and foreign policy.  Her views on all of these would have been mainstream Democrat in 2008 when Obama won the presidency, but were now viewed as 'far right' positions.  RFK Jr. has been an environmentalist for all of his professional life and a vaccine skeptic for nearly 20 years.  He was a Democrat through all that time until last year, when he became an independent.  Then he supported the Republican to Make America Healthy Again.  Why didn't his message resonate with his old party?  Elon voted for Biden in 2020.  However, the censorship that followed led him to buy Twitter.  Like RFK Jr., he is clearly on the environmentalist side of the aisle - traditionally aligning with Democrats - but he too switched to the Republican candidate.  Elon has tweeted this image to show how he didn't leave the party, it left him:

Remember, Obama opposed same sex marriage in 2008, the trans issue was on the far fringe, and Democrats were the anti-war party.  Today, Trump is anti-war, has no issue with same sex marriage, and opposes transgenderism with regard to minors.

When the party flip story is told, it is always about racism.  Democrats grew into anti-racists and Republicans - the party created to oppose slavery - adopted racism to win votes.  No.  That is false.  However, it does seem that the parties have traded some policies over the years.

Escape to Athena (1979)

It is 1944 in the Greek isles.  The Nazis are pursuing several escapees from the local prisoner of war camp.  Among them are Professor Blake (David Niven), Bruno Rotelli (Sonny Bono), and Nat Judson (Richard Roundtree).  The trio are brought back to the camp and the commandant, Major Otto Hecht (Roger Moore), talks to them like a disappointed father.  The SS Officer, Major Volkmann, would rather they were shot, but Hecht asserts his authority over camp prisoners.  Hecht is an Austrian art dealer who has found himself in the German Army.  In addition to the camp, he oversees the archeological site that provides valuable artefacts for the Third Reich.  Of course, he skims the best pieces for himself.

Charlie Dane (Elliot Gould) and Dottie Del Mar (Stephanie Powers) are American entertainers who were recently captured and routed to the camp.  Otto is quite pleased to welcome Dottie and arranges for her to have a private room where he visits.  Dane, who is obviously Jewish, he allows to arrange a show to entertain the guards.  In the nearby town, Zeno (Telly Savalas) leads the Greek resistance.  He plans to first capture the POW camp, then the town, and finally assault the communication station that has been setup at the monastery on Mount Athena.  Sounds like an exciting action movie in theory, less so in practice.

The movie suffers from too many characters and not a clear villain.  Early on, Major Volkmann is generally the villain.  Then the villain becomes a Nazi at Mount Athena.  Nor is there a central hero.  Though Zeno is the man behind all the action, he is tight-lipped and doesn't tell anyone what is happening.  As such, some events come as a surprise to his allies - Charlie, Bruno, & Nat - though not to Zeno.

Roger Moore is miscast as a German/Austrian officer.  He himself said as much.  However, the movie offered an opportunity to 'vacation' in the Greek isles with his friend David Niven and have nights on the town with Telly Savalas.  I imagine this movie was a lot of fun to make.

Charlie is a fast-talking goofball who somehow transforms into a wisecracking commando.  The transition from one to the other was quite sudden and entirely unbelievable.  Of all the men Zeno could take on his assault on Athena, he chose Charlie?  Of course, Charlie didn't want to be a commando, but there was the promise of vast piles of gold.  Crazy as it was, Charlie proved to be a highlight of the movie.

There are a couple of love stories in the mix.  Major Hecht pursues Dottie, which is awkward considering he is her jailor.  Then there is Zeno and Elena (Claudia Cardinale), the madam of the local brothel.  In addition to his love interest, she plays his conscience.  Yes, she is less than keen on his risking lives of Greeks on his grand designs.

The finale turned into a Bond film, as the Nazis deploy a rocket from a secret base to sink the allied fleet.  What?  As if this film wasn't bonkers already.

Light, mindless, popcorn fun.

Barry Lyndon (1975)

Recently, I clicked on video about the movie Barry Lyndon, something along the lines of why it is a great movie.  Of course, I have long viewed it as the worst movie Kubrick ever made, at least of the ones I've seen.  Yes, the cinematography is glorious, the lighting magnificent, the costumes outstanding, and the setting astonishingly well realized.  However, Barry Lyndon is a terrible human being.  If he had been shot dead by the highway robbers at the beginning of his story, the world would have been a better place.  The only time I even mildly respected Lyndon was when he fired his shot at the ground rather than blowing the head off his insufferable stepson.

In many ways, the movie reminds me of Martin Scorsese films.  The hero is actually a villain but is glorified on film.  There is no empathizing with these sociopaths.  I want a hero's journey, not a villain's journey.  It's not even a morality tale, warning the viewer away from such behavior.

Because I clicked on that video, I have been fed more and more Barry Lyndon-related videos, all of them painting it as a wonderful film, maybe Kubrick's best.  Ugh.  He had wanted to do a period piece and had been working on a Napoleon film.  However, Waterloo (1970) was released as a box office loser, nixing funding for more Napoleon films in the near future.  He shelved Napoleon and switched to Barry Lyndon.  Oh, the tragedy!

Only the devoted Kubrick fan - who wants to see all his films - should waste time on this travesty.  Thumbs way down.

The Fictional Party Flip

Democrats are always eager to explain away the past dark periods of their party by explaining how the parties flipped.  Post Civil War, blacks supported the Party of Lincoln, the Republican Party.  Democrats may have been forced to surrender slavery, but they imposed Jim Crow as soon as Reconstruction ended.  This continued for decades, especially since the Republicans held dominance in the government from 1861 until 1913.  In 1913, Woodrow Wilson was inaugurated president and reintroduced segregation in federal workplaces.  He was an apologist for the South and screened Birth of a Nation at the White House.  However, when FDR was elected in 1932, he retained segregation.  In 1948, Harry Truman desegrated the military.  In 1954, during the presidency of Dwight Eisenhower, the Supreme Court overturned the policy of 'separate but equal.'  Eisenhower set about enforcing this with the National Guard and pushing both the 1957 and 1960 Civil Rights Acts.

By the time JFK arrived in office, the writing was on the wall for segregation.  It was doomed and any Democrat with sense was going to abandon it.  Where Republicans had argued to just treat blacks like everyone else, Democrats embraced a strategy of one-upmanship.  Not only would they pass the 1964 Civil Rights Act (with strong bipartisan support), but they would also implement affirmative action.  Though a noble goal, it assumed employers were guilty of discrimination if the pool of employees did not match local demographics.  So, the Democrats went from discriminating against blacks to now discriminating in their favor.  Low grade reparations?  Though Republicans continued with the same old policy of just treat everyone the same, that now meant repealing quotas.  That's anti-black!  Sigh.

The Democrats have spent decades claiming that Republicans are holding blacks back and yet, most blacks live in cities that have been governed by Democrats for all those decades.  For instance, Detroit hasn't had a Republican mayor since 1962.  Whose fault is the decline of that city?  What about St. Louis?  Last Republican mayor left in 1949.  Philadelphia?  Last Republican mayor left in 1952.  The modern Democrats are the same as the old Democrats, they have just changed their tactics.  The Democrats have trapped blacks in a new kind of plantation - harvesting their votes during election season by blaming the Republicans for their misery.

Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell (2015)

Gilbert Norrell (Eddie Marsan), who claims to be a practical magician (i.e. can cast spells) has been buying every book on magic throughout England.  Theoretical magicians (i.e. those who don't cast spells but merely study the history of English magic) have complained.  Moreover, they accuse Norrell of being a charlatan.  Mr. Norrell offers to perform practical magic.  However, he demands that the Learned Society of York Magicians disband should he be successful; if he fails, he will renounce his claims of being a practical magician.  After Norrell's magnificent display of magic and the York Society's disbandment, Norrell goes to London where he hopes to revive English magic.  His first noteworthy feat is to resurrect the recently deceased Lady Pole.

Meanwhile, Jonathan Strange (Bertie Carvel) finds himself gifted with two spells by a crackpot named Vinculus.  As a lark, he attempts to cast one of the spells and it works!  He is one of the two magicians foretold by Vinculus' crazy prophecy.  He soon joins Mr. Norrell in London, where he becomes an apprentice magician.

But all is not well with English magic.  Norrell was always wary of fairies but dared call upon one (Marc Warren) to revive Lady Pole.  Norrell has kept silent about his indiscretion, but the fairy is now free to roam England and create mischief.  Bit by bit, the fairy enchants various people and carries them away to the land of fairy, Lost Hope.  Can Norrell and Strange summon the Raven King to oppose the fairy or are they doomed to die from some fairy curse?

This 7-epsiode epic does a surprisingly good job of adapting the book.  In fact, it improves upon the book in many ways.  Firstly, it is not necessary to constantly refer to the fairy as 'the man with thistle-down hair.'  He is never named in the series and that is not a problem at all.  There is only one time when he is described as the man with thistle-down hair and that comes as something of an insult from Lady Pole.  Nice.  Many of the minor characters are completely absent.  Excellent.

Eddie Marsan is terrific as Norrell.  Bertie Carvel makes an outstanding Jonathan Strange.  Marc Warren is perfect as the fairy.  The lesser characters are also wonderfully cast and play their parts well.  This is a great production.  Like the novel, it ends with the potential of a sequel, though that has yet to happen.  Of course, Clarke didn't write a sequel.  Not yet, anyway.

If you liked the book, you'll enjoy this.  Highly recommended.

Wanted: Dead or Alive (1987)

Nick Randall (Rutger Hauer) is a former top espionage operative who has become a bounty hunter based in Los Angeles.  For those who watched the 1950s TV show of the same name, Nick Randall is a descendent of Josh Randall (Steve McQueen).  Randall is living well, having a huge building for his office, and a comfortable boat for his home.  He has a girlfriend, Terry (Mel Harris), who might be wife material.  A couple more big jobs and he could invest in a life at sea on his boat.  Yes, life is looking up until his old life intrudes.

Malak Al Rahim (Gene Simmons) is a terrorist who Randall failed to kill during his espionage days.  Malak has arrived in Los Angeles and begun a bombing campaign.  He has also sought to assassinate his former adversary.  Philmore Walker (Robert Guillaume), a former associate when Randall was a spy, hires Randall to hunt down Malak.  Randall agrees as long as he is allowed to work solo.  Director Lipton (Jerry Hardin) views Randall as bait to draw Malak out of hiding; if Randall is killed in the process, Lipton would view that as a bonus.

A standard 80's action flick that hits the normal beats.  There are explosions, gun battles, car chases, and fist fights.  The story is run-of-the-mill, the acting is adequate, and the action is average.  Even so, it is fun to watch.

Street People (1976)

Salvatore Francesco is a mafia boss in San Francisco.  He is tired of being a boss and had tried to retire from the life several years earlier.  His nephew, Ulysses (Roger Moore), takes care of all the legal and financial aspects of Sal's businesses.  Sal paid for Ulysses to go to college and served as a father figure when he was growing up.  To demonstrate that he isn't all bad, Salvatore anonymously paid to have a Sicilian crucifix imported to the United States for his church.  However, someone used his gesture of goodwill to smuggle millions of dollars' worth of heroin inside the crucifix.  Furious, Father Francis, the local priest, confronted Salvatore and excommunicated him!

Sal put his nephew on the case to find out who was responsible.  Ulysses called in his racecar driver friend, Charlie (Stacy Keach), and the pair commenced the investigation.  While Ulysses flew to Sicily to find the link on that end, Charlie went hunting for rumors of the heroin in San Francisco.  With Ulysses' list of names from Sicily and Charlie's gumshoe work, the pair are soon on the track of the three goons.  But who do they work for?

The movie has a few flashbacks to 1930s Sicily where we see a young Salvatore thrilled to be an uncle and how he brags to Francis (the same Francis who would later excommunicate him) about that.  There are also scenes of Ulysses as a toddler and Ulysses' English father.

Stacy Keach steals most scenes that he is in.  His demolition derby of a test drive with the chief goon's car is great fun.  He's a happy-go-lucky thrillseeker and lots of fun.  By contrast, Moore is charming but uninspired.  The role is not well-written and his kinship to Salvatore not well-established.  The audience is told they are close but it does not seem that way in their interactions.

The plot is a mess.  There is a good story to be had here, but the execution is poor.  Though the truck chase was entertaining, there was no explanation for it.  How did the sniper know to be on the roof?  How was it that two trucks were ready to intervene if the sniper was followed during his escape?  There are a lot of people taking part in this cover-up.  Gee, who did those truck drivers work for?  Maybe we could follow that lead?  Yes, it isn't meant to make lot of sense, but it was exciting as it progressed.

Mediocre.

Wild Swing in Participation

As everyone knows by now, Donald Trump has won the election and thus will be the second president to serve non-consecutive terms.  Grover Cleveland served as both the 22nd and 24th President.  That's interesting, but what I find more interesting is the vote totals in the last several elections:

These are the vote totals for Democrat and Republican candidates over the last 5 elections.  As this doesn't consider 3rd parties, it is just ballpark but useful.  Here it is as a chart:

2008 was a banner year, the biggest turnout ever in which President Obama won nearly 70 million votes but his reelection in 2012 saw a drop off in participation of roughly 2.5 million voters.

2016 exceeded 2008 in total voters (Trump and Hillary drove a surprising number of voters to the 3rd parties) but the two parties only received about 2 million more votes than in 2012.

2020 blew the doors off all previous elections, seeing nearly 27 million more voters than 2016!

As of this writing, 2024 has seen a stunning drop of 16 million voters.  Where did they go?  Is this a matter of apathy, tougher voting requirements, or something else?  A ballot arriving in the mailbox while everyone was quarantined by COVID offered a distraction whereas today voting was just a hassle?  This will be a topic for the history books in the not-too-distant future.

But Georgia is not called for Trump?

 

Reporting percentage is greater than in Virginia but still no call.  Interesting.

Strange that Virginia is already called for Harris

 

Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell

This is a quirky, slow-paced novel with features that commend it and failings that detract from it.  The pacing is hard to overcome.  Generally, I maintain a rapid pace through fiction, but this was a long hard slog.  No sooner do you get involved in one storyline than Clarke plods off to some other character.  Steven Black, Lady Pole, Arabella, and the Graysteels were more often speed bumps than enjoyable characters.  By and large, they were helpless victims, which is rarely fun to read.  On top of that, many of the other characters lacked any redeeming qualities (e.g. Drawlight, Lascelles) and were therefore also a slog to read.  Moreover, if the words “I dare say” were removed from the book, it would probably be 20 pages shorter.  Why must everyone begin their sentences with ‘I dare say?’  That got old really fast.  On several occasions, Clarke would restate something obvious (e.g. ‘they left the dining room, where they had been convened’).  Um, yeah.  I was just reading how they were convened in the dining room, so you don’t need to explain to me that they had been convened there now that they are leaving.  Gads.  Early in the book, she also had a nasty habit of refusing to use pronouns.  Then she had some odd devices (thankfully abandoned in the later part of the book) such as suggesting conclusions to the reader rather than just stating them.  At one point, a lady is speaking and the author as a parenthetical note “who we must now presume to be Mrs. Wintertowne.”  Why must we presume?  Tell us or don’t tell us but this is almost insulting, as if I wouldn’t have figured it out on my own.  Finally, the narrative is murky.  The author refers to herself more than once but then drifts back to generally a 3rd Person Omniscient.  The footnotes give the impression that this is a scholarly work.  Then, there is the use of ‘we’ that includes the reader so that perhaps it should be viewed that she is reading to us in the drawing room, adding her comments as she goes.  Messy.  Distracting.

Jonathan Strange is clearly the hero of the novel and he is generally a likeable character.  However, he is curiously incurious about some things that should have demanded his attention.  Mr. Norrell had been brought to the pinnacle of success by having revived Lady Pole.  Despite several years as Norrell’s apprentice, Strange apparently never asked how Norrell achieved this feat.  Oh, he argues the minutia of a dozen other things but shows no curiosity over the defining achievement.  This is made all the more troublesome when Strange’s wife dies.  Gee, if only there was a way to bring her back.  Hey, Norrell did it!  I’ll ask him.  No, such does not happen.  Why?  Perhaps there are good reasons that he didn’t consider reviving his wife but that should be explained to the reader.  Speaking of his wife’s death, there was so much that was peculiar and yet he never saw magic in it.  He had credible reports of his wife in two places at the same time but never considered magic.  He had dueled with some invisible magician but never thought that magician would trouble him again, perhaps stealing his wife.  While trying to locate his missing wife with magic, he determined that she was not in England, Ireland, Scotland, or France but it didn’t occur to him that perhaps she had been magically spirited away.  No, he fully accepted that his wife had inexplicably wandered the snow-covered hills over several days and that led to her fatal illness.  Too often, this supposedly smart man was profoundly stupid.

Who was the man with Thistle-down hair?  Oh, he was a fairy but what was his history and how did he relate to the Raven King?  Clarke showered us with deep discussions on the history of English Magic, footnotes on obscure stories about minor magicians, and countless legends about the Raven King but she never explains who the villain is.  During the novel, we are told that a curse will end with the death of the person who cast the curse.  Okay, that’s good to know.  So, is Strange freed of the man with thistle-down hair’s curse?  No.  Why not?  And what kind of curse is that anyway?  It’s always nighttime around you?  Sure, it causes the candle bill to go up but that’s about it.  Strange seemed just fine otherwise (excepting the self-inflicted insanity).

There is a lack of focus.  Much attention was placed on the shopkeeper who had a crush on Steven Black and then, after the glowing coins incident, she simply vanishes.  The same can be said of Strange’s apprentices who are important for a while then, poof, he leaves them behind and, except for the brief incident of the disappearing book, they are not seen again.  Why did we get such a strong introduction of Jeremy (Strange’s servant) and his dealings with Strange’s father only to have him devolve to a very minor character?  Clarke feels compelled to provide massive character sketches for people who will soon vanish from the book or be relegated to minor support characters.  In many ways, the book can be seen as a number of short stories stitched together to make an overlong meandering novel.

It was nice to finally see the Raven King though his role was quite small.  However, we are led to believe that the prophecy that Vinculus repeated for the three concerned parties (Norrell, Strange, and Steven Black) was in truth just part of a spell to dislodge the Thistle-down man from Lost-Hope.  Could not he have been a bit more direct?  Am I to take it that John Uskglass arranged everything to work out just as it did?  Why didn’t he crush the Thistle-down man himself?  Why this roundabout solution?

It was hard to like any of the characters.  Norrell, who dominates the first part of the book, is extremely unlikeable.  Here is a man whose stated goal is to return magic to England and yet he spends most of his time squashing would-be magicians and concentrating all sources of magical learning in his own private collection.  Yes, he wants the return of English magic as long as he is the sole practitioner.  Hardly a return at all.  Worse still, he knows exactly what has happened to Lady Pole and makes no effort whatsoever to rectify the situation.  He takes on an apprentice and then intentionally misleads him about the true breadth of magic, best exemplified by the discussion over magic rings.  Norrell is to magic knowledge what China is to the internet.  As Norrell’s pawn, Childermass was usually on some disreputable task.  However, he developed into a far more likeable character than Norrell.   By the end of the book, I wanted to see more of Childermass.  Norrell’s other disreputable associates, Drawlight & Lascelles, were scum who took far too long to die.  This too speaks volumes about Norrell.  I have already discussed the problems with Strange.  Lady Pole starts off with promise but simply becomes a shrew – with cause certainly but a shrew, nonetheless.  John Segundus is rather bland and unexplored.  He has promise but his appearances are too far apart.  It is clear that he has some natural talent for magic (e.g. he sensed the labyrinth at Norrell’s home, he invaded the dream with Strange, he saw the rose over Lady Pole’s mouth, etc.).  Vinculus was the breakout character, fun in his every appearance.  A fraud, a charlatan, a bigamist, a mystical book, a vagabond, a prophet, and apparently unable to die (for now); this character was more interesting than any three other characters combined.  Unlike most character, he had real purpose, one that he diligently performed in his peculiar manner.  The rest of the characters are just victims, helplessly waiting for the mean Norrell or the oblivious Strange to rescue them from their captivity.  When they were finally rescued, I really didn’t care.  They had become nothing more than useful plot devices for the story, not actual characters that the reader should care about.

Clarke does a good job with Lord Wellington.  I enjoyed his appearances, such as they were.  Of course, the presence of Strange in Wellington’s army can’t help but diminish Wellington.  The book posits that Wellington would surely have lost Waterloo but for the help of Strange.  In truth, he won without Strange.  Still, that is a minor quibble that only a stickler for history would mention.

The massive background for English magic is amazing.  There is much on the history of John Uskglass the Raven King, as one would expect.  However, there are details on the Golden Age Magicians, then the Silver Age Magicians, even talk of the merely theoretical magicians, the qualities of Fairies, the lands of Fairy, and tales of Martin Pale, Catherine of Winchester, Ralph de Stokesey, Thomas Godbless, and others I have forgotten.  The depth and breadth of magical history is unparalleled.  I am reminded of Tolkien’s appendices that detailed the rulers of Gondor over the millennia.  With this impressive foundation, Norrell and Strange fit much more easily in England during the Napoleonic Wars.

The book ends in such a way as to provide plenty of room for a sequel.  There is the oddity of Childermass reviving the Learned Society of York Magicians to decode Vinculus the Book.  There is Strange assuring Arabella that he will return to her once he and Norrell undo the curse.  There is the tantalizing fact that the Raven King is still active though we saw but a glimpse of him.  However, I am unlikely to read anything else from Ms. Clarke on account of her failings.  If I had one suggestion for her, it would be to repeat Shakespeare’s observation that "Brevity is the soul of wit."  She needs a better editor who can cut away the vast excess in her narrative and keep her on point.

Two stars.

Local Hero (1983)

Knox Oil is developing oil rigs in the Atlantic off the coast of Scotland and needs a location for a refinery.  The tiny seaside town of Ferness looks to be ideal.  It is thus decided that "Mac" MacIntyre (Peter Reigert) is the man to send; after all, he's of Scottish descent.  In fact, he's of Hungarian descent and his ancestors chose the name because it sounded American to them.  Before he departs, Mac has a brief meeting with Felix Happer (Burt Lancaster), the owner of Knox Oil & Gas.  Oddly, Mr. Happer's biggest concern is the sky, especially around Virgo.  He wants regular reports from Mac.  He arrives in Scotland and is met by Danny Olsen (Peter Capaldi), a Knox Oil rep in the UK.  The pair make a brief stop at a Knox facility to learn about the proposed oil facility and meet Marina (Jenny Seagrove), the lovely assistant of Dr. Geddes.  Both Mac and Danny are smitten.  Then it is off to Ferness, where they meet Gordon Urquhart (Denis Lawson), who serves as hotelier, bartender, accountant, and local deal maker.  And then the story grinds to a halt.  Mac and Danny wander the beach and otherwise while away the time while Gordon negotiates with the residents.  All but one are eager to sell, but the one happens to own the beach!

Mac's life in Houston is not going well.  Though he is making good money, owns a Porsche, and is being entrusted with this important deal, his personal life is empty.  Before leaving, he made a couple efforts to get a date, but they fell through.  Once in Ferness, he is quite envious of Gordon's life, especially his wife, Stella.  While drunk, he suggested swapping lives, offering all he had in Texas for the comparatively modest life that Gordon had.  Back in Texas, he is clearly not happy to be home.

Felix Happer is an oddball.  He has a wacky shrink (Norman Chancer) who insults and berates him - it's therapy - and keeps doing so even after being fired.  His fascination with the stars outweighs his interest in oil, which is strange for the head of an oil company.

Danny Olsen speaks half a dozen languages, but not Gaelic.  That was mildly amusing; Capaldi is Scottish.  He is generally awkward and hopelessly in love with Marina.  When she unexpectedly emerges from the surf at Furness in SCUBA gear, he desperately pursues her.  The pair always meet on the beach, usually as she pops out of the water.  Is she a mermaid?  There are hints that she may be.  Huh.

Gordon Urquhart is the town fixer and general jack-of-all-trades.  He runs the hotel, waits the tables, stands in as bartender at the pub, plays the accordion in the local band, and keeps the accounts of everyone, including Victor, the Russian fisherman who makes regular visits.

Overall, the movie is slow paced and has a dearth of comedy.  The fish out of water theme only goes so far, especially since both Mac and Danny are soon enamored of Ferness.  It is humorous how eager the residents are to sell out their slice of heaven to the oil company while the buyers want to settle down in the village.  There is also the running gag of the motorcyclist who narrowly avoids running down the characters when the exit the hotel.  Despite getting 100% on Rotten Tomatoes, I found it to be just so-so.

Special Report with VP Harris

VP Kamala Harris was interviewed by Brett Bair this week.  It proved to be a contentious interview as Brett asked some pointed, hard-hitting questions.  He hammered away at the immigration issue, first asking the VP how many illegal immigrants the administration had released into the country.  When she did not offer a number, he posited 6 million.  VP Harris replied by accusing Donald Trump of torpedoing a border bill; Trump wants the border issue alive for the election and thus used his pull to sink efforts to fix it.  This is so, but much of the damage from immigration took place before that, notably a trio of young women slain by immigrants released into the country.  Hard hitting indeed.  When Harris sought to place blame on Trump, Bair repeatedly observed that she had been in office for the past 3 and a half years.

Overall, this was clearly a tough interview for Harris.  Brett was polite but did not let Harris filibuster.  It was funny when he apologized for talking over her but then pressed on with his question.  She rarely had good responses and more often sought to dodge the questions and shift to blaming Trump.  This 20-minute exchange demonstrated that most media only ask softball questions.  Between this and the recent 60 Minutes interview, Harris has had a tough time.

This is more likely to hurt Harris than help her.

Cuba (1979)

Major Robert Dapes (Sean Connery) arrives in Cuba during the revolution.  He has been hired by General Bello (Martin Balsam) to help deal with the revolutionaries.  Dapes is given an assistant/minder, Captain Ramirez (Hector Elizondo), and authority to go where he will.  Though he begins well enough, he forgets his purpose when he spots Alexandra "Alex" Pulido (Brooke Adams), a woman whom he loved in North Africa during World War II.  Alex is married to the owner of a cigar factory, Juan (Chris Sarandon), who is cheating on her with Therese (Lonette McKee).  Therese's brother, Julio, is furious about the affair and intends to kill Juan for the effrontery.  Of course, Julio is also a revolutionary.  Meanwhile, Larry Gutman (Jack Westson) is an American businessman who is eager to purchase the cigar factory.  In order to get the cigars to Miami, he seeks out Donald Skinner (Denholm Elliott), the owner of Skinner Air and a man not above selling ammunition to the revolution.  Yes, there are entirely too many characters in this story, each of whom get solo attention through the movie.

It was funny to see David Rappaport as part of the cast.  He and Connery would star together again in both Time Bandits (1981) and Sword of the Valiant (1984).  His role is small (no pun intended), and partly dubbed.  Either that, or he could really deepen his voice.  His use of a pistol was unintentionally comical.

The ensemble cast is entirely wrong for the movie.  As a mini-series, this lack of focus might have been fine, but here Director Richard Lester only has 2 hours to tell his story.  The emotional rollercoaster between Dapes and Alex is unbelievable.  Dapes acts like Alex was the love of his life and he has not been involved with anyone since.  Maybe he hasn't, but that isn't made clear.  It gets weird when she reveals that she was 15 during the affair.  Yikes.  Clearly, Lester wanted to offer a cross-section of Cuba at the time of the revolution, giving a picture of all facets of society at the time.  Yes, it is often interesting but not entertaining.  It is eager to show how bad Batista was and thus paints the revolution as something positive.  The movie ends on the 'high note' of Castro entering Havana.  Then again, all of the characters we have met are worse off than when they started.

Skip this one.

World War III?

Simon Webb of History Debunked suggests that World War III has already begun.  In fact, he proposes that the first world war should be the Napoleonic Wars, which spanned a decade (1803-1815) and involved actions from India to the Caribbean, and the Middle East to Scandinavia.  The current situation has recently seen North Korean troops heading to Ukraine to aid the Russians.  The NATO powers are funding and supplying equipment to Ukraine, most notably the United States.  In fact, US soldiers are stationed in Israel to man anti-missile batteries.  Israel's war with Gaza has leaked over into Lebanon.  Iran has fired yet another barrage of missiles, which Israel will soon answer.  Will that draw Iran into the war?  Maybe.  He notes that previous world wars were easily defined thanks to the war declarations by each side.  Few participants are declaring war but certainly engaging in war-making activities.

I would not call this a world war yet.  It is more like a new chapter of the Cold War.  Yes, the Cold War ended more than 30 years ago, but this has the same vibe.  If all that it requires to be a World War is the participation of many countries, the Korean War should count.  The UN (led by the US) was on the side of South Korea and while the Chinese & Russians supported North Korea.  Similar conflicts happened throughout the world during the Cold War.

Cold War II.  For now.

Department of Cost Cutting?

Trump has talked about utilizing Elon Musk as a government efficiency expert.  Musk himself has posted about a Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which neatly aligns with a cryptocurrency that is associated with him.  Clever.  The new idea from Trump was a Secretary of Cost Cutting.  Much as I want government spending trimmed, a new department is not the way to do it.  The department might work worders for an administration or two, but it would soon suffer the fate of all government agencies: a desire to grow.  Soon, the trick of cost cutting would match the current definition.

Today, government cuts are made to the rate of growth.  So, if the Department of Superfluous Spending had a budget of $20 million this year and was projected to get a 10% increase, the Department of Cost Cutting could announce a $1 million cut so that the budget for next year is only $21 million.  Yes, all those budget cuts through the years have been of this sort.  The DOGE would adopt this strategy within a decade and become a useless waste of taxpayer money, like most government agencies.

Even if Elon does a miraculous job, it will only be a brief pause in the ever-expanding government.  Congressional action is required to shrink government.  Departments must be eliminated, not merely partially defunded.  Funds will just pour back in down the line.  Follow Argentina's Milei and slash government agencies.

The Next Assassin

A heavily-armed man (shotgun & handgun) with fake press credentials attempted to enter a Trump rally.  In his vehicle, they found fake passports and driver's licenses.  Whether he intended to assassinate Trump is not clear; the Riverside County Sheriff is certain that an assassination attempt was foiled while federal agencies currently disagree.  Was he just a guy who forgot to leave his guns at home when going to a presidential rally?  Gee, that seems unlikely.  What's with all the passports and the phony press pass and VIP pass?  Based on what I've heard so far, I'd lean toward the sheriff's view.

What is causing all these crackpot assassins?  Usually, assassins are young men, but this one is in his late 40s and the last one was in his 50s.  The crackpot who shot at a bunch of Republicans on a baseball field several years ago was also an older man.  This is unusual.  There is something about our modern society that breeds crazies.  There were no school shootings when I was a kid.  It started in the late 90s and continues today.  What changed?