Saturday, August 20, 2016

Bore Dogs


It's not quite as awful as the trailers and commercials made it out to be but it's a lot more boring.

Jonah Hill isn't the lead.

Due to some hideous narration, he's not even the co-lead.

Why do you cast Jonah in a film and then turn it over to Miles Teller?

Why is Miles ever cast in a movie?

Because he's an average looking White boy?

He's supremely untalented and has no screen presence.

You get the idea that he's 'reassuring' to a bunch of post-middle aged, portly White men running studios.

Every laugh in the film, every moment of enjoyment comes via Jonah Hill.

And Miles bleeds the life out of every frame.

Some wondered, as they walked out of the showing I saw the film at, if this was supposed to be social satire?

Satire requires a point of view.

Director Todd Phillips has no point of view. 

He's also not much of a director.

The reliance on Teller's narration exists mainly because Phillips has no idea how to tell a story.

He should be directing some bad TV reboot -- maybe a new RENEGADE -- not films.

In the end, the only thing you walk away from the film with is respect for Jonah Hill.

There's nothing really on the screen except for Jonah.

It's as though he's interacting with stick figures.

Going out with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Friday, August 19, 2016.

Starting with the US presidential race . . .

4.7m children in need humanitarian assistance - that’s almost 1 in 3 children in the country


When are candidates going to have to answer how to address this issue?

Especially anticipating Hillary Clinton's response since she voted for the Iraq War and supported it for years as a US Senator and then came back around to supporting it as a Secretary of State.

Where are your answers, Hillary?

You unconvincingly use terms like "regret" and "sorry" -- briefly use them -- but where is the act of contrition, Hillary?

Where is your effort to fix what you have done wrong?

The children of Iraq suffer.

They suffer by living in the continued illegal war that you helped unleash.

The children of Iraq suffer from birth defects from the chemicals used in the war.

The children suffer by becoming refugees.

By losing one or both parents.

What is your answer, Hillary?

What is your proposal as Iraq has become a country with one of the youngest median ages in the world?

What is your proposal as children suffer?

It takes a village?

I guess pushing your responsibilities off on a collective is one of avoiding your mistakes/crimes.

Resilience of people in is being stretched to breaking point. Thousands who fled are still displaced


But you're running for president and you should be able to answer basic questions like what are you going to do about the refugee crisis in Iraq?

8 months pregnant in an airport shelter, the fate of one


You're going to change the world for women and girls -- that's what Gloria Steinem and other idiots keep insisting.

So what are you going to do for the women and girls above?

Gloria's not doing a damn thing for them.  She doesn't care about them.

Can we assume the same of you, Hillary?

Or how about Phyllis Bennis.

Phyllis has been the great dabbler when it comes to Iraq.

She picks it up from time to time as though it's a seasonal sport.

She went on DEMOCRACY WHEN? this week to say Hillary is right about Donald Trump.


When she's attacking Donald Trump for failing to aid in creating a new Red scare?

(Considering Phyll's politics, I am surprised.)

When he's saying we don't need to be involved in all these wars?

When, Phyllis, when is Hillary spot on in her criticism of Donald?

Phyllis then wanted to crib from this site and pick up the point I've been making for months, Hillary needs to answer questions about Iraq that go beyond her 2002 vote and address what she would do today.

Thanks for cribbing, Phyllis, but next time call me so I can walk you through the points you haven't put in the time to brush up on.

To defend Hillary, a new push has emerged: "Rape is okay!!!!"

Writer Liza Featherston (author of FALSE CHOICES: THE FAUX FEMINISM OF HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON) notes this disgusting and disappointing trend in a series of Tweets and reTweets:

  1. Nathan Tankus Retweeted Liza Featherstone
    Yup. I thought they'd just ignore the Bill rape stuff, not create a "woke rapist" trope.
    Nathan Tankus added,
Sometimes I think ppl in One PIerrepont Plaza must read these media apologetics, snicker: CAN YOU BELIEVE WE ARE NOT EVEN PAYING THESE PPL
I expected Woke Tim Kaine. Nothing HRC does is shocking, it's the creative intellectual gymnastics of her supporters that continue to amaze.
I did not expect that to get behind idea of defeating Trump, we'd be asked to believe in crazy Russian conspiracies, rape apologetics.
These people recoil at "lesser evil" frame. Offended by the very idea Clintons could be "evil" and will not stand for it.
I expected to often agree with Democrats, once primary was over. Hey, Trump sucks amiright? But still with the most ridiculous commentary!
What's the single most reactionary position we can get Hillary supporters to defend before the primaries end?
Liza Featherstone Retweeted Will Menaker
I predict...male prerogative to rape and still be a feminist. Throwing poor women off welfare. War. OH WAIT...
Liza Featherstone added,
How to be a male feminist ally: schedule a post-rape phone call to unpack & apologize.
Feminism is a big tent. But I didn't know it had seating section for rapists.
If you're writing think pieces saying that it's OK if Bill Clinton is a rapist pls ask yourself where you went wrong in your life.

Liza's got the Tweet of the week with the last one:  "If you're writing think pieces saying that it's OK if Bill Clinton is a rapist pls ask yourself where you went wrong in your life."

On Iraq, again, what would Hillary do?

Mwattin Leebi Retweeted #IRAQ شمرية العراق
After driving Sunni is out of their homes gov.t left them with no shelter no water no food
Mwattin Leebi added,

This is an ongoing war and people are suffering.

Presidential candidates need to be discussing this and laying out plans.

Turning to violence, Thursday, the US Defense Dept announced:

Strikes in Iraq
Attack and fighter aircraft conducted five strikes in Iraq, coordinated with and in support of Iraq’s government:

-- Near Mosul, four strikes struck three ISIL tactical units and destroyed 38 ISIL oil tanker trucks, five ISIL vehicles and six ISIL assembly areas and denied ISIL access to terrain.

-- Near Ramadi, a strike destroyed two ISIL vehicles and an ISIL shelter.

Task force officials define a strike as one or more kinetic events that occur in roughly the same geographic location to produce a single, sometimes cumulative, effect. Therefore, officials explained, a single aircraft delivering a single weapon against a lone ISIL vehicle is one strike, but so is multiple aircraft delivering dozens of weapons against buildings, vehicles and weapon systems in a compound, for example, having the cumulative effect of making those targets harder or impossible for ISIL to use. Accordingly, officials said, they do not report the number or type of aircraft employed in a strike, the number of munitions dropped in each strike, or the number of individual munition impact points against a target. Ground-based artillery fired in counterfire or in fire support to maneuver roles is not classified as a strike.

And bombs in Baghdad (not dropped from on high) killed 5 people and left nine more injured.

No comments: