I like Gilda Radner but she's barely in the film. She may have six scenes the whole movie.
Instead, you're stuck with non-actress Kelly LeBrok. I saw LeBrok in something about seven or eight years ago (something that was new then). It was a bad movie and she was bad in it. But she looked very pretty. She's nothing special in "The Woman In Red." Maybe it's the decade? Maybe it hasn't yet aged well? (The film came out in 1984.) Judith Ivey also looks lousy and possibly it's the 80s but those eyebrows are frightening. (They're not thick and bushy, they're non-existent.) I'm also not a fan of Ivey's at all. I think she's a bad actress who plays wet blanket (unintentionally) in everything. Didn't she help ruin "Designing Women"?
Here, her role is minor. More minor than Gilda's but she's in more scenes than Gilda, so Ivey doesn't really harm the film.
But LeBrock offers nothing. And she is not pretty enough -- forget beautiful -- that you can forgive her the bad acting. If she were gorgeous in the film, you could. You'd say, "Oh, a wooden but beautiful person." You'd assume the attraction was purely physical (which is what the script seems to suggest though director Gene Wilder tries to soften that).
But if you leave that to the side, you're left with a film that works in many places and that's largely due to Gene Wilder and Charles Grodin. Grodin was really good in a number of films including "Ishtar," "Seems Like Old Times," "The Heartbreak Kid" and, his first film, "Rosemary's Baby." Here's he's one of Wilder's three friends who are always obsessed with women and scoring with women and scoping out women and . . . Joseph Bologna's wife leaves him beacuse of his cheating. The four men are always thinking up excuses to go run off together. And one afternoon, as the four are having lunch, this man comes up and gives Grodin a set of keys and tells him it's over. All this time Grodin's been gay and living with a man.
The scenes that follow are the best because Wilder makes a point to make clear that Grodin's still the same friend. And they've got a nice scene. And that's it. It's not, "Let's explain it or let's talk this to death." That would ahve been out of character for the characters. It's just accepted and so is Grodin.
Near the end, as Wilder seems about to go off with LeBrock, the film really loses it because he's being sucked into a lifeless vacuum. He needs someone to play off of. He doesn't get it. But the film does rally when suddenly LeBrock's husband arrives on the scene.
I wouldn't rate it as Gilda and Gene's best pairing (that's "Haunted Honeymoon" followed by "Hanky Panky") but I'd give a solid B. In terms of Gene's films, it's behind "Young Frankenstein," "Silver Streak," "Stir Crazy," "Sherlock Holmes' Smarter Brother," "Blazing Saddles," "The World's Greatest Lover" and "Willy Wonka & The Chocolate Factory." But it's better than "Another You" and "See No Evil Hear No Evil" and way better than "Funny About Love."
Going out with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"
Friday, May 25, 2012. Chaos and violence continue, the Russian bikers tortured by Nouri's forces are released, Nouri's brown shirts take to downtown Baghdad as they've done so many Fridays before to stage a faux protest, the US prepares to arm Nouri, Memorial Day weekend is upon us, and more.
Starting in Russia. Yesterday it was learned that four Russian bikers were grabbed in central Iraq by Nouri's security forces, imprisoned and beaten. The four are: Oleg Kapkayev of Saint Petersburg, Alexander Vardanyants and Maxim Ignatyev of Vladimir and Oleg Maximov of Tula. Russian Legal Information Agency reports that the wife Oleg Maximo spoke to her husband and he told her they were being moved to another location.
Dmitry Rogozin is the Deputy Premier of Russian Government tasked with the defense and space industry.
That Tweet reads: 'The Russian bikers detained in Iraq are at the Embassy of the Russian Federation [in Baghdad]. Motorcylces have not been returned yet. Thanks to everyone who helped.' The Moscow Times notes, "[Russian President Vladimir] Putin has been forging good relations with the biker community in the past two years, riding motorcycles and attending biker events." RIA Novosti adds, "The four men will leave for Russia on Saturday morning, the bikers' lawyer Alexander Orlov, also a member of the Moscow-based motorcycle club Rolling Anarchy MCC (RAMCC), told RIA Novosti."
As many are noticing, the US press has ignored the story completely. That may be due to the fact that there's a detail that's inconsistent -- not on-message -- with Barack Obama's current campaign for a second term as US President. Ekaterina Saviba (Gazeta) reports it today:
They came to Iraq on May 17 and were detained by the Iraqi military on May 20. "Our attempt to go towards Baghdad failed because of Yanks in Hummers – they didn't let us in. Our guys decided to go round the American checkpoints and pass north of them," report motorcyclists' friends on the Russian motorcycling forum Ruriders.ru. "They managed to ride several dozen kilometers a day, while having long heartfelt conversations with local authorities, all while the outside temperature was 42 Celsius."
Again, that was also in yesterday's reports. The Russian bikers, en route to Baghdad, were unable to enter the city and had to go around due to Americans blocking them in Hummers, due to American checkpoints. The 20th was Sunday and the US may have activated some branch still in Iraq (there are many) to put up checkpoints in advance of the meet-up in Baghdad. They may have pulled the units stationed outside of Iraq -- in Kuwait for example -- back in to set up those checkpoints.
Along with the usual Russian contingent which staffs the country's Baghdad embassy, other Russian officials were in the country this week as Nouri's Iraq hosted talks with Iran about the nuclear program. Ali Arouzi (NECN News -- link is text and video) reports, "International nuclear talks being held in Baghdad this week with Iran ended inconclusively with both sides at a stalemate." A stalemate grows in Nouri's Baghdad? What a complete lack of surprise?
The ongoing political stalemate in Iraq could see Nouri al-Maliki face a no-confidence vote that, if successful, would remove him as prime minister. Alsumaria reports that the 'Badr brigade' says this would be the worst thing that could happen. The Badr brigade only split or 'split' from the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq when it had to (or risk ISCI being outlawed). They still take their orders from Ammar al-Hakim and the US has been very successful in buying al-Hakim's support for Nouri. al-Hakim has already made statements like those made similar statements out of his own mouth. Now he uses the Badr brigade as a megaphone in the hopes that this will give the (false) appearance of a wave of support for Nouri surfacing.
How did things get to this point?
Iraq's currently in Political Stalemate II. Political Stalemate I followed the March 7, 2010 elections in which Iraiqya -- headed by Ayad Allawi -- came in first and Nouri al-Maliki's State of Law came in second. Despite herculean efforts on Nouri's part -- some legal but most questionable or outright illegal -- to walk away with the election, he was runner up. But Nouri wanted to be Miss Iraq, he wanted the crown and felt he did very well in the swimsuit competition. He had the backing of the White House and the Iranian government. for his desired second term as prime minister. The Iraqi Constitution, the election results and the will of the Iraqi people were all against Nouri; however, Barack Obama doesn't care about rule of law or democracy. He wants what he wants when he wants it. And like Bully Boy Bush before him, Barack packed a chubby for Nouri.
So for over eight months things were at a standstill. Then in November 2010, the US brokered an agreement among the political blocs. This is known as the Erbil Agreement (because it was signed off in Erbil). In exchange for giving Nouri a second term, the US insisted, the blocs would receive concessions that they wanted. This is the agreement that was agreed to.
The Erbil Agreement wasn't about all the political blocs saying, "We don't want anything. Give Nouri a second term!" To get the blocs on board it was necessary for them to be offered arrangements that would benefit them. And with everyone agreeing to the deal -- including Nouri -- and with the US government brokering it and insisting it was sound, the political blocs fel tthey deal was solid.
Nouri used it to become prime minister-designate and then, in December 2010, beging his second term as prime minister. But that's all that happened. He refused to implement the agreement. He offered one excuse after another as is his way. He distracts and stalls and hopes the other side gives up. He's done that over and over.
By last summer, the Kurds had enough of the stalling. They publicly demanded that the Erbil Agreement be implemented. Their call was quickly joined by Iraqiya and Moqtada al-Sadr. And it wasn't implemented. And it's still not implemented. April 28th, there was another Erbil meet-up and among those participating were Moqtada, KRG President Massoud Barzani, Allawi and Iraqi president Jalal Talabani. In their meeting they agreed that Nouri needed to implement the agreement or face a no-confidence vote. They also agreed that Moqtada al-Sadr's 18-point plan needed to be implemented. Moqtada delivered the message, implement the Erbil Agreement or face a vote of no-confidence. As the end of the month gets closer, the number of MPs reportedly willing to vote out Nouri grows. This week alone, it's grown from over 163 to 200.
A list of potential replacements has been named. All on the list come from the National Alliance (a Shi'ite group which ISCI, State of Law, Moqtada's bloc and others belong to). Kitabat reminds that the National Alliance is supposed to be naming a single choice of who should be Nouri's replacement. But through it all, Moqtada has repeatedly noted publicly that Nouri can stop this at any point prior to the vote. All he has to do is implement the Erbil Agreement.
Not only does he refuse to, the White House refuses to call that out. They brokered the agreement, they gave the political blocs their word that the agreement was legal and would hold. The White House brokered the agreement and swore it would be upheld. They have betrayed the Iraqi people. These are the betrayals that lead people to stop trusting the US. These are the type of betrayals the people of Iran spent decades living with. It's not smart to betray people, it's not smart to make a promise and not keep it.
And all those promises
That you made me from the start
Were filled with emptiness
From the desert of your heart
Every sweet caress
Was just your second best
-- "All Those Promises," written by Janis Ian, first appears on her Folk Is The New Black
And now the White House thinks they can act like they're not involved? Now they want to pretend like they have to stand on the sidelines?
And they're not on the sidelines, they're repeatedly pimping for Nouri. For example, the US State Dept issued this readout of the meeting between William Rurns, Deupty Secretary of State, and "Iraqi Acting Minister of Defense" Saadoun al-Dulaymi:
Today, Deputy Secretary Burns met with Iraqi Acting Minister of Defense Saadoun al-Dulaymi, at the Department of State to discuss issues of mutual interest and our shared commitment towards a long-term partnership under the Strategic Framework Agreement. Minister Dulaymi is in Washington as lead of the Iraqi delegation for inaugural meetings of the Defense and Security Joint Coordinating Committee between the United States and the Government of Iraq. Deputy Secretary Burns noted the importance of these meetings as an excellent mechanism to build our mutual commitment to an enduring security partnership under a civilian-led process.
The meeting also covered bilateral issues on the security and political fronts and the Deputy Secretary offered our continued support as Iraq strengthens its democratic institutions and enhances the capacity of its security forces to bring greater stability and prosperity to its people. On Iraqi political issues, the two discussed the importance of resolving differences through dialogue and compromise and in a democratic fashion in accordance with the Iraqi constitution.
The Deputy Secretary expressed appreciation to Minister Dulaymi for Iraq's willingness to host the E3+3 meetings in Baghdad and noted that, following the successful hosting of the Arab Summit in March, it is another sign of Iraq taking a constructive role in the region and with the international community to reach shared goals of greater regional stability. Deputy Secretary Burns assured Minister Dulaymi that the United States would continue to support Iraq in its effort to strengthen ties with its regional neighbors.
And the Defense Dept issued this American Forces Press Service story about Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta meeting with al-Dulaymi. There's no "acting defense minister." Not per the Iraqi Constitution. The prime minister nominates someone to be Minister of Defense and Parliament says yes or no via a vote. That's how it's supposed to work per the Constitution. But Nouri's never put a name to the Parliament. The minute he does, he doesn't control the Defense Ministry, the Minister does. Why are US public servants wasting time and tax payer money meeting with these non-ministers? If they hadn't lied so much -- the White House -- $500 million wouldn't have already been wasted on the police training program this year. Most Americans don't realize that the Iraqi police are under the Ministry of the Interior and even more aren't aware that Nouri has never named a nominee for that position either.
How do you waste $500 million US tax payer dollars on a training program for a ministry that has no minister? That's your first clue that the money's going to be wasted. Nouri was supposed to have named a full Cabinet before he was moved from prime minister-designate to prime minister. It's a power-grab and the US government enables and endorses it.
The Defense Dept issued the following late yesterday:
I seem to remeber, a few years back, a US Senator talking about the danger that we would arm Nouri with the weapons he could use on his own people. Maybe that observation doesn't matter because the man is no longer a US Senator -- now he's Vice President of the United States. Joe Biden knew this was a problem in 2008. I'm failing to see how anything's changed to make Nouri less at risk of attacking the Iraqi people.
Yesterday the US State Dept released 2011 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices and here's how the section on Iraq opens:
During the year the most significant human rights developments were continuing abuses by sectarian and ethnic armed groups and violations by government-affiliated forces. Divisions between Shia and Sunni and between Arab and Kurd empowered sectarian militant organizations. These militants, purporting to defend one group through acts of intimidation and revenge against another, influenced political outcomes. Terrorist attacks designed to weaken the government and deepen societal divisions occurred during the year.
The three most important human rights problems in the country were governmental and societal violence reflecting a precarious security situation, a fractionalized population mirroring deep divisions exacerbated by Saddam Hussein's legacy, and rampant corruption at all levels of government and society.
That doesn't qualify as a ringing endorsement of Nouri al-Maliki.
Today the US puppet sent his little cult into the streets of downtown Baghad. Alsumaria reports that the thug's thugs were out in full force, carrying signs supproting Nouri and insisting that anyone not supproting Thug Nouri was influenced by foreign countries. They also threatened violence if Nouri was subjected to a no-confidence vote. Ayad Allawi, leader of Iraqiya, noticed what took place this morning. Alsumaria reports that he charges Nouri with attempting to take the political crisis into the Iraqi street and to scare people into silence. Allawi says that if there is any bloodshed, Nouri will be responsible.
"We were preparing a party for her birthday, which was May 11, a party she was not able to enjoy. She was going to be 26 years old when she died." That's Ramon Rubalcava speaking about the 2004 death of his daughter Isela Rubalcava. Spain's wire service EFE notes Isela Rubalcava was born in El Paso to Maria Isela and Ramon Rubalcava and she was killed in a Mosul mortar attack on May 8, 2004 becoming "the third woman of Mexican descent to die on the Iraq war front and the first woman from El Paso to die in combat." She is one of at least 4488 US service members to die in the Iraq War. Monday is Memorial Day. At Huffington Post, Jim Downs offers the origins and history of Memorial Day. Dora Robles Hernandez (Detroit Free Press) notes that Saturday through Monday will see the Detroit area host 20 different Memorial Day parades. Though not all metro areas will see that many events -- for example, the states of New Hampshire and Maine will have about that many events this weekend combined -- there will be observations throughout the US. And because it's Memorial Day, the Sunday chat and chews finally find veterans issues and the Chair of a veterans committee. Sunday on CNN's State of the Union, Senator Patty Murray (Chair of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committe) will be among the guests which also include Iraq War veteran Paul Rieckhoff of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, the American Legion's Tim Tetz and Peter Chiarelli who is now a retired general and who has carved out a role for himself advocating on behalf of those with Post-Traumatic Stress and coming up with proposals to allow the stigma attached to PTS to be removed. It should be a very interesting broadcast. (I was asked to note this by a friend who endorses Chiarelli's PTS work.)
To address veterans issues in a meaningful way that actually helps, bi-partisanship is needed in the Congress -- a point Senator Mike Johanns made Wednesday in a Senate Veterans Affairs Committee hearing entitled "Seamless Transition: Review of the Integrated Disability Evaluation System." Senator Patty Murray is the Chair of the Committee, Senator Richard Burr is the Ranking Member. There Committee heard from one panel of witnesses: DoD's Dr. Jo Ann Rooney, GAO's Daniel Bertoni and the VA's John Gingrich. We covered Chair Murray's questions and some of the report entitled Interim Committee Staff Report: Investigation of Joint Disability Evaluation System in Wednesday's snapshot, Ava covered Senator Jon Tester's questioning in "How to keep the witness focused (Ava)," Kat reported on Ranking Member Richard Burr's participation with "Senator Burr: I've had too many of these hearings" and Wally focused on how the VA claiming next year they'll fix things or the next year or the next never does anything but waste the Committee's time and the taxpayers' money with "It's your money (Wally)." Ava, Kat and Wally covered important aspects of the hearing so please read their reports. From Kat's, we'll note this:
Ranking Member Richard Burr: So we're all in agreement that we're just south of 400 days in the cycle of an applicant being processed? 395, I think, 394. In May 2011, the Secretary of the Defense and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs committed to revising the IDES [Integrated Disability Evaluation System] so that it could be completed in 150 days and went further and agreed to explore options for it to be 75 days. Now I-I -- I've had too many of these hearings. We have them every year. And we hear the same thing: "Oh, gosh, look at what we're doing." Now I've heard the most glowing progress report from both of you and then I get the realities of the days haven't changed. You have met some improvements in certain areas. I commend you on that. The timeliness goals in areas have been better. But the reality is that we've got a broken system and we're five years into it and I hear testimony where 'we're starting to begin to review our business processes.' Well, you know, why did it take five years to get to this? What -- What can you convey to me today that's concrete, that tells me a year from now, we're not going to be at 393 days. When you [Dr. Jo Ann Rooney] said earlier, "We're instituting IT changes this summer that will improve our times by thirty or forty," I thought you were going to say "percent." And you said "days." So now my expectations are that if we implement what you just said, we're going to be down to 360 days which exceeds the DES [Disability Evaluating System] and Secretary of the VA by the 110 days over what their goal was for today.
At its most basic, the VA and the Defense Dept are attempting to make the transition from service member (DoD's role) to veterans (VA's role) seamless and timely. That's not happening currently. with respect to Integrated Disability Evaluation System, this is supposed to determine whether or not a service member is able to continue serving. If the answer is no, the service member then becomes a veteran and VA needs to have a disability claim. The disability rating will determine the benefits. So it matters. And the Interim Committee Staff Report noted examples including, "A servicemember with a lung condition who was being treated with steroids and immunosuppressive drugs was incorrectly rated at 0% rather than 100%."
Not only are there problems with the disability ratings, there's the problem with the length of time they take. This isn't minor if you're the veteran and you're waiting for a disability check that you've more than earned to come but it's not in the mail. Committee Chair Patty Murray noted 27,000 have waited over 100 days to go through the system.
As he questioned the witnesses, Senator Mike Johanns observed, "I don't hear anything that makes me feel 'Gosh, we're going to turn the corner here.' In fact, I must admit, quite the opposite, I'm going to walk away from this hearing very, very worried that the system is imploding." Even the issue of supervision was a question mark. Senator John Boozman wanted to know who was in charge of overseeing the joint-DoD and VA effort? The best answer he received was that John Gingrich was the point-person for the DoD side; however, he stated he does not oversee the VA effort.
Who is responsible for overseeing the full project and not components or pieces?
No answer was ever provided.
Senator Boozman declared, "I guess I would like to see somebody accountable for the whole system. And you may be that person but it's not fair to you if you don't really have authority to see it through. So I personally think that the two Secretaries need to designate somebody that's got the authority." Possibly if there was one person responsible for overseeing it, the process would be moving along more smoothly and much quicker. That was the argument Boozman made and it sounds reasonable. But did anybody listen? Will a single person be named to be responsible for overseeing the entire project?
Senator Johanns wanted to know much longer it is going to take -- "1 year, 2 years, 5 years?" -- for the goals to be met? No one could provide an answer. "I can't give you a specific time frame," Daniel Bertoni told him. But he did note that enrollments continue to rise -- 19,000 just last year -- and that this adds to to the delays.
We'll close with this from Senate Veterans Committee Chair Patty Murray's office:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Thursday, May 24, 2012
Murray (202) 224-2834
Collins (202) 224-2523
Michaud (202) 225-6306
VETERANS: Murray, Collins, Michaud Applaud Veterans Homes Fix in Military Construction Spending Bill
(Washington, D.C.) – Today, U.S. Senators Patty Murray (D-WA) and Susan Collins (R-ME), members of the Military Construction Appropriations Subcommittee, along with U.S. Representative Mike Michaud (D-ME), Ranking Member of the House Veterans' Affairs Subcommittee on Health, applauded the inclusion of an amendment in the Senate Military Construction and Veterans Affairs spending bill which would modify the way State Veterans' Homes are reimbursed for nursing home care provided to veterans. The Senate Committee on Appropriations approved the bill on Tuesday by a vote of 30-0. The amendment, authored by Senator Murray, would result in more flexibility in determining reimbursement rates by requiring VA and the State Veterans' Homes to collaborate in setting rates that accurately reflect the level of care provided. Washington and Maine are home to State Veterans' Homes which require a high level of skilled nursing due to requirements by Medicare and Medicaid. However, currently the VA payments do not cover this level of care.
"This amendment is a critical step to ensuring Washington State Veterans' Homes will not lose out on millions of dollars they need to keep operating," said Senator Murray. "Thankfully we were finally able to move forward to provide this flexibility -- preventing staff layoffs which would have dramatically reduced the number of Washington veterans they serve. I am grateful to Senator Collins and Representative Michaud for their leadership on this issue."
"By granting the Department of Veterans Affairs increased flexibility in reimbursement rates, our goal is to recognize the high-quality of care State Veterans' Homes provide disabled veterans and ensure they never have to turn away any of our veterans because of inadequate reimbursement from the VA," said Senator Collins. "The men and women cared for by State Veterans' Homes defended our freedom, many of them in combat. We must defend their right to the care they deserve."
"Our severely disabled and elderly veterans deserve access to the best possible care and Congress cannot wait any longer to address the shortfalls our State Veterans' Homes are facing," said Representative Michaud. "I am grateful for Sen. Patty Murray's collaboration and leadership on this issue and I look forward to continuing to work with her to ensure that this issue is resolved before the end of the year."
Deputy Press Secretary | Social Media Director
Office of U.S. Senator Patty Murray