Logging
Film: Once Upon A Time in The West
Forgive me, because I'm new to having a nice HD flatscreen TV, but there is something pretty amazing at being able to stream a movie like this via Netflix for a mere $7.99 a month on the incredible quality of an HD TV right in one's living room. It certainly does not match the theater experience...but then again...it isn't 1968 and time travel is incredibly expensive. I love the rhythm in this movie and I'm not sure if it is the same in all Leone Westerns, but the scenes are very slow and deliberate and patient and then erupt into sudden action and then onto the next. In the better scripts I've written, my rhythm tends to be the opposite, where I like to open scenes up into action (I call it front-loaded action) and then end scenes on the smaller, character beats.
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
Monday, November 14, 2011
Logging
TV: Cheers, Pilot-Ep. 3; Parks and Rec; More Twin Peaks, S. 2
Cheers pilot is excellent. Most notable thing - how much of the comedy is rooted in character vs. jokes/gags. Actually has quite a melancholy tone. Today, something with this tone becomes a mini-major comedy...almost the closest thing would be an Alexander Payne movie or something. Surprised by how much backstory they get into the pilot - and how rich the backstory of each character is. They all feel as though they've lived big past lives before even entering the show. Maybe that is the charm.
TV: Cheers, Pilot-Ep. 3; Parks and Rec; More Twin Peaks, S. 2
Cheers pilot is excellent. Most notable thing - how much of the comedy is rooted in character vs. jokes/gags. Actually has quite a melancholy tone. Today, something with this tone becomes a mini-major comedy...almost the closest thing would be an Alexander Payne movie or something. Surprised by how much backstory they get into the pilot - and how rich the backstory of each character is. They all feel as though they've lived big past lives before even entering the show. Maybe that is the charm.
Baby Boomer Fail
An interesting article on the failures of the Baby Boomer generation.
Ouch.
An interesting article on the failures of the Baby Boomer generation.
What the Boomers as a generation missed (there were, of course and thankfully, many honorable individual exceptions) was the core set of values that every generation must discover to make a successful transition to real adulthood: maturity. Collectively the Boomers continued to follow ideals they associated with youth and individualism: fulfillment and “creativity” rather than endurance and commitment. Boomer spouses dropped families because relationships with spouses or children or mortgage payments no longer “fulfilled” them; Boomer society tolerated the most selfish and immature behavior in its public and cultural leaders out of the classically youthful and immature belief that intolerance and hypocrisy are greater sins than the dereliction of duty.
Ouch.
Saturday, November 12, 2011
In Fairness
At least one person has written a calm, reasoned piece on Paterno and Penn State.
True 'dat.
At least one person has written a calm, reasoned piece on Paterno and Penn State.
But I will say this: Paterno has paid a price here. His job is gone. His life’s work has been soiled. His reputation is in tatters. Maybe that should be the price. Maybe there should be more of a price. You don’t have to type: “Well, his price is nothing like the price of those victims…” I already know that.
But I think the way Joe Paterno has lived his life has earned him something more than instant fury, more than immediate assumptions of the worst, more than the happy cheers of critics who have always believed that there was something phony about the man and his ideals. He deserves what I would hope we all deserve — for the truth to come out, or, anyway, the closest thing to truth we can find.
I don’t think Joe Paterno has gotten that. And I think that’s sad.
True 'dat.
Oh, That's Why
I hadn't been to the movies in awhile, but now I realize why. Check out the top ten. Jesus. What a joke.
1. Immortals - you couldn't pay me to watch this a joke of a movie
2. Jack And Jill - wasn't this one of the Sandler posters in Funny People?
3. Puss In Boots - i get it, but i don't watch cartoons because i'm not 6 years old.
4. Tower Heist - ratner is a clown and incapable of making a good movie, although his interviews are entertaining.
5. J. Edgar - if this isn't clint's worst movie ever, you need to rethink him as a filmmaker. it is that bad. it is so bad, it cancels out 1/2 of how awesome unforgiven is...sort of like if your 401k has a killer year and then the next year loses all of that money. unforgiven in basically the best western of the modern era and j. edgar is so bad, it wipes out half of the goodwill created in making a modern classic. this is hard to do.
6. Harold & Kumar 3D Christmas - there is nothing that can be said.
7. In Time - an original movie, too bad it totally sucked
8. Paranormal Activity 3 - found footage, sequel, horror movie - this is like the hitler/stalin/mussolini pact
9. Footloose - craig brewer goes out on a whimper.
10. Real Steel - sadly, it probably is the best movie on this entire list and it is about boxing robots.
I hadn't been to the movies in awhile, but now I realize why. Check out the top ten. Jesus. What a joke.
1. Immortals - you couldn't pay me to watch this a joke of a movie
2. Jack And Jill - wasn't this one of the Sandler posters in Funny People?
3. Puss In Boots - i get it, but i don't watch cartoons because i'm not 6 years old.
4. Tower Heist - ratner is a clown and incapable of making a good movie, although his interviews are entertaining.
5. J. Edgar - if this isn't clint's worst movie ever, you need to rethink him as a filmmaker. it is that bad. it is so bad, it cancels out 1/2 of how awesome unforgiven is...sort of like if your 401k has a killer year and then the next year loses all of that money. unforgiven in basically the best western of the modern era and j. edgar is so bad, it wipes out half of the goodwill created in making a modern classic. this is hard to do.
6. Harold & Kumar 3D Christmas - there is nothing that can be said.
7. In Time - an original movie, too bad it totally sucked
8. Paranormal Activity 3 - found footage, sequel, horror movie - this is like the hitler/stalin/mussolini pact
9. Footloose - craig brewer goes out on a whimper.
10. Real Steel - sadly, it probably is the best movie on this entire list and it is about boxing robots.
J. Edgar
Impotent. Is the best word I can come up with to describe the Eastwood/Dustin Lance Black collaboration. Dead on arrival. I knew within 30 seconds the movie was completely lifeless, uninspired, just one steaming hunk of shit. Four words into the voice over to open the film and it was snooze-a-rooz. What is going on? Clint has taken this "I shoot the first draft of the script," too far. Or perhaps he forgot how to read. Dustin Lance Black is the most overrated writer in Hollywood. Milk was carried only by Sean Penn's performance. The screenplay, I remember thinking when I watched the film, was terrible. This movie only confirms my original instinct. The problem, I'm nearly positive, has to do with a cinematic education. Who are these screenwriters who think by reading biographies and interviewing people who knew J. Edgar, that they can construct a film via history? This is amateur hour, the approach an undergraduate with a small interest in movie would take. They go for "psychological realism." I have a better term for it - steaming hunk of dog shit. There is no cinematic tradition considered in the conception of this movie. Did he even consider Citizen Kane? Has he seen the movie? I'm not even a fan of Kane, but isn't this the obvious starting point for doing a biopic about someone like J.Edgar Hoover. Yikes. I love Clint, but if I'm Warner Bros, I'm seriously considering pulling his carte blanche and Dustin Lance Black very well might be a good and decent person, but he should not be paid to write screenplays.
Impotent. Is the best word I can come up with to describe the Eastwood/Dustin Lance Black collaboration. Dead on arrival. I knew within 30 seconds the movie was completely lifeless, uninspired, just one steaming hunk of shit. Four words into the voice over to open the film and it was snooze-a-rooz. What is going on? Clint has taken this "I shoot the first draft of the script," too far. Or perhaps he forgot how to read. Dustin Lance Black is the most overrated writer in Hollywood. Milk was carried only by Sean Penn's performance. The screenplay, I remember thinking when I watched the film, was terrible. This movie only confirms my original instinct. The problem, I'm nearly positive, has to do with a cinematic education. Who are these screenwriters who think by reading biographies and interviewing people who knew J. Edgar, that they can construct a film via history? This is amateur hour, the approach an undergraduate with a small interest in movie would take. They go for "psychological realism." I have a better term for it - steaming hunk of dog shit. There is no cinematic tradition considered in the conception of this movie. Did he even consider Citizen Kane? Has he seen the movie? I'm not even a fan of Kane, but isn't this the obvious starting point for doing a biopic about someone like J.Edgar Hoover. Yikes. I love Clint, but if I'm Warner Bros, I'm seriously considering pulling his carte blanche and Dustin Lance Black very well might be a good and decent person, but he should not be paid to write screenplays.
Friday, November 11, 2011
One More Thing Re: Joe Pa
I view the the vilification of Joe Pa as a witch hunt, encouraged by the media. This is why: Let's us assume the worst - that Joe Pa - knew Sandusky was shady, also knew about the rape AND knew Sandusky was still running camps for boys on the Penn State campus AND therefore knew it was probable that Sandusky was still raping little boys. And he turned a blind eye. Why did he need to be fired at the peak of the media hysteria? If he is guilty of these things, time won't change it. There will be plenty of time for his legacy to be forever tarnished and the proper punishment to be applied. But no. The demand is that he be fired IMMEDIATELY without deliberation, without knowing all the facts, without calm, civilized, orderly thinking.
Look, a similar thing happened in Iraq with Saddam Hussein. They rushed to trial and execution and while it is without question Saddam deserved the death penalty, the process was uncivilized. The ends don't justify the means and we don't even know what Paterno knew. It is simple what is going on - people are worked up into hysteria and damaging the lives of individuals not because they are guilty of crimes - but because we are looking for people to blame, whether they are guilty or not.
UPDATE: Okay, two more things...Megan McArdle has an article up about the rumors Sandusky was pimping out little boys to doners.
Yeah, this idea sounds like an incredibly over-the-top episode of Law & Order SUV. Impossible to believe. I think I need to stop writing and thinking about this story. There without a doubt, should be an investigation to figure out what happened. But let me be clear - I don't give two shits about Paterno as a legend or a fatherly figure - I have no investment in Penn State or big time college football except as a casual fan. And from that perspective, I have no grudge or axe to grind about "paternalistic" organizations or societies, nor a particular love or hate of college football. I view Paterno as a man and a person who most likely has some moral failings and administrative problems running a large organization. Penn State football could disappear tomorrow and my life would be no different. So all that said, as a person, Paterno does not deserve the wrath of hatred directed toward him. He may at one point, but not right now. Not based on rumors and speculation. Not based upon American instinctive distrust of the powerful. Not because we find it ironic when squeaky clean people fall off their perch. And not because of the sicko factor of child molestation, which we all know exists and happens.
I view the the vilification of Joe Pa as a witch hunt, encouraged by the media. This is why: Let's us assume the worst - that Joe Pa - knew Sandusky was shady, also knew about the rape AND knew Sandusky was still running camps for boys on the Penn State campus AND therefore knew it was probable that Sandusky was still raping little boys. And he turned a blind eye. Why did he need to be fired at the peak of the media hysteria? If he is guilty of these things, time won't change it. There will be plenty of time for his legacy to be forever tarnished and the proper punishment to be applied. But no. The demand is that he be fired IMMEDIATELY without deliberation, without knowing all the facts, without calm, civilized, orderly thinking.
Look, a similar thing happened in Iraq with Saddam Hussein. They rushed to trial and execution and while it is without question Saddam deserved the death penalty, the process was uncivilized. The ends don't justify the means and we don't even know what Paterno knew. It is simple what is going on - people are worked up into hysteria and damaging the lives of individuals not because they are guilty of crimes - but because we are looking for people to blame, whether they are guilty or not.
UPDATE: Okay, two more things...Megan McArdle has an article up about the rumors Sandusky was pimping out little boys to doners.
At least it offers a motive. And yet . . . it seems completely implausible. How does one go about marketing one's alumni relations department as a potential procurer of underage boys for wealthy pedophiles who perhaps also happen to be fans of the Nittany Lions? And how do you make sure that no one--in the department or elsewhere--tells the police? I find these rumors basically impossible to believe.
Yeah, this idea sounds like an incredibly over-the-top episode of Law & Order SUV. Impossible to believe. I think I need to stop writing and thinking about this story. There without a doubt, should be an investigation to figure out what happened. But let me be clear - I don't give two shits about Paterno as a legend or a fatherly figure - I have no investment in Penn State or big time college football except as a casual fan. And from that perspective, I have no grudge or axe to grind about "paternalistic" organizations or societies, nor a particular love or hate of college football. I view Paterno as a man and a person who most likely has some moral failings and administrative problems running a large organization. Penn State football could disappear tomorrow and my life would be no different. So all that said, as a person, Paterno does not deserve the wrath of hatred directed toward him. He may at one point, but not right now. Not based on rumors and speculation. Not based upon American instinctive distrust of the powerful. Not because we find it ironic when squeaky clean people fall off their perch. And not because of the sicko factor of child molestation, which we all know exists and happens.
Irony
Harvard students occupy own campus. If they aren't the 1%, who is?
Kinda tough to have it both ways, methinks, that is to say, be apart of the 1% and then protest against it. Of course, what this protest is really all about, is the 1-2% protesting against the 1%.
Harvard students occupy own campus. If they aren't the 1%, who is?
Kinda tough to have it both ways, methinks, that is to say, be apart of the 1% and then protest against it. Of course, what this protest is really all about, is the 1-2% protesting against the 1%.
Thursday, November 10, 2011
Jonathan Gold
2011 Essential 99 Restaurants.
Who is the best LA-based journalist/writer? Jonathan Gold/Food? Bill Simmons/Sports? Nikki Finke/Movie Biz? Kevin Drum/Politics?
Those last two are generous additions. I must be missing some other possible nominees...
2011 Essential 99 Restaurants.
Who is the best LA-based journalist/writer? Jonathan Gold/Food? Bill Simmons/Sports? Nikki Finke/Movie Biz? Kevin Drum/Politics?
Those last two are generous additions. I must be missing some other possible nominees...
Christmas Tree War and Tax
How the fake tree industry lobbies Washington to tax real trees.
Charlie Brown would be very upset.
How the fake tree industry lobbies Washington to tax real trees.
Charlie Brown would be very upset.
Love It
What a great article on Jim Harbaugh. My favorite tidbits:
and this
and this
Great story. My favorite is the last bit...
Think about this - in 2006 Harbaugh was coaching a I-AA school that didn't have scholarships. Five years later, he's coaching the Niners and will probably win coach of the year. Granted, he was a pro quarterback, but think about how many retired pro quarterbacks there are...a lot. The man moved up very quickly.
What a great article on Jim Harbaugh. My favorite tidbits:
It's about Harbaugh's childhood as the youngest son of former longtime college coach Jack Harbaugh, back when his family never complained about constant moving or tiny, cramped homes. Jack actually would get so energized while driving his kids around that he'd shout, "Who has it better than us?" Every time, Jim would scream with his older brother John and younger sister Julie, "Nobody!"
It's a message that has so resonated with the 49ers that they chant "Nobody!" every time Harbaugh yells, "Who has it better than us?" after practices and games.
and this
The people who know Harbaugh best say there is no mystery to that approach. He has always prided himself on his toughness. This is the same guy who, as the starting quarterback for the Indianapolis Colts, once injured his right hand while punching former Buffalo Bills quarterback and NBC broadcaster Jim Kelly before a 1997 game against San Diego. The minute Harbaugh heard that Kelly had called him "a baby" on the air, Harbaugh found the man and confronted him.
and this
Said Jack Harbaugh: "Jim went back to Al a couple years later and said he had a good shot at getting the head coaching job at San Diego. Al said, 'USD? Jim, why would you want to go there?' Jim said he'd read Al's bio and remembered that Al had taken a college job early in his career. That's when Al said, 'Yeah, Jim. That was U-S-C!' " Harbaugh was so committed to winning at USD that 49ers quarterbacks coach and good friend Geep Chryst said, "They had to calm him down at times. He was running the program like it was Michigan."
Great story. My favorite is the last bit...
Think about this - in 2006 Harbaugh was coaching a I-AA school that didn't have scholarships. Five years later, he's coaching the Niners and will probably win coach of the year. Granted, he was a pro quarterback, but think about how many retired pro quarterbacks there are...a lot. The man moved up very quickly.
Oscars
With Eddie Murphy out, my obvious first choice would be Ricky Gervais. Why not? Pluck him away from the Golden Globes. Now, I know this wouldn't actually happen. So let's get more obvious - Jerry Seinfeld. Seinfeld is the perfect Oscar host. Squeaky clean. Inoffensive. Loved and respected both by the old time traditionalists and the edgy young folks. The guy obviously likes movies. I could see this being his thing for the next 10 years. What else is he doing? The only question is whether Seinfeld is actually up for it. Hosting the Oscars is no easy thing and Seinfeld, creatively, hasn't exactly been at his apex in recent years. But then again, he's just hosting. One thing Seinfeld can bring is confidence and stature. He can stand with the biggest movie stars and directors in the world and feel comfortable. A lot of the newer, first time hosts, I think get nervous and feel unworthy of the task.
With Eddie Murphy out, my obvious first choice would be Ricky Gervais. Why not? Pluck him away from the Golden Globes. Now, I know this wouldn't actually happen. So let's get more obvious - Jerry Seinfeld. Seinfeld is the perfect Oscar host. Squeaky clean. Inoffensive. Loved and respected both by the old time traditionalists and the edgy young folks. The guy obviously likes movies. I could see this being his thing for the next 10 years. What else is he doing? The only question is whether Seinfeld is actually up for it. Hosting the Oscars is no easy thing and Seinfeld, creatively, hasn't exactly been at his apex in recent years. But then again, he's just hosting. One thing Seinfeld can bring is confidence and stature. He can stand with the biggest movie stars and directors in the world and feel comfortable. A lot of the newer, first time hosts, I think get nervous and feel unworthy of the task.
Wednesday, November 09, 2011
JoPa
Paterno got fired. This is absurd...not much different from a witch hunt. Paterno did nothing, as far as I can tell, wrong. He is being accused of "not doing enough about this child molester." What was he supposed to do? Arrest the man, try him in court, and put him in jail? The guy is a football coach. According to the ESPN story, he didn't even know the guy had raped someone and thought he had been caught "fondling." So he reported up the chain of command. Now all the self-righteous media people have got the nation up in a fury about a moral obligation to do more. What exactly? What is this standard we are suddenly inventing as a nation that powerful, respected people are supposed to be? Superheroes?
Here is what is happening -- people are freaked out and irrational about child molestation and rape. It is the most horrific thing we can all imagine. It sickens us. And it is making us behave irrationally toward anyone who in theory could have prevented it. But they didn't know. So we have this outpouring of anger towards Paterno. Why? There is not a similar anger towards the child molester who actually did the crimes. Why not? Because people don't give a freaking shit about the victims or the crime or anything. They give a shit about the "story" and they like the irony of squeaky clean Jo Pa being morally negligent. And they are out for blood. This moralizing is disgusting, especially because everyone knows one week from now the story will be over and we'll all be on to something else. Meanwhile, the same "outraged" people will just return to their every day lives and not spend one single moment of their own personal energy or money to help stop child molestation or the victims of such crimes and will just go on reading their freaking newsfeeds and checking facebook status updates. What a bunch of vultures.
Paterno got fired. This is absurd...not much different from a witch hunt. Paterno did nothing, as far as I can tell, wrong. He is being accused of "not doing enough about this child molester." What was he supposed to do? Arrest the man, try him in court, and put him in jail? The guy is a football coach. According to the ESPN story, he didn't even know the guy had raped someone and thought he had been caught "fondling." So he reported up the chain of command. Now all the self-righteous media people have got the nation up in a fury about a moral obligation to do more. What exactly? What is this standard we are suddenly inventing as a nation that powerful, respected people are supposed to be? Superheroes?
Here is what is happening -- people are freaked out and irrational about child molestation and rape. It is the most horrific thing we can all imagine. It sickens us. And it is making us behave irrationally toward anyone who in theory could have prevented it. But they didn't know. So we have this outpouring of anger towards Paterno. Why? There is not a similar anger towards the child molester who actually did the crimes. Why not? Because people don't give a freaking shit about the victims or the crime or anything. They give a shit about the "story" and they like the irony of squeaky clean Jo Pa being morally negligent. And they are out for blood. This moralizing is disgusting, especially because everyone knows one week from now the story will be over and we'll all be on to something else. Meanwhile, the same "outraged" people will just return to their every day lives and not spend one single moment of their own personal energy or money to help stop child molestation or the victims of such crimes and will just go on reading their freaking newsfeeds and checking facebook status updates. What a bunch of vultures.
Logging
TV: Twin Peaks
Finished season 1. Okay - the show loses SOME steam. I think the pilot and the first couple episodes are the best. For my taste, I would have liked the straight ahead mystery with the oddball idiosyncrasies established early on in the story versus the surreal, dream-like story elements. They don't resolve the murder of Laura Palmer, but this did not anger me like some fans of the Killing. I still feel as though I am in good hands with the story-tellers and suspect the story is going to be resolved. But I could be wrong. They ended the first season with an interesting twist.
Mystery on tv is a tricky thing. It seems to me, for the genre, you need to answer the whodunnit question. Twin Peaks easily could have offered an answer as to who killed Laura Palmer in the first season and then continued on. The second season could continue on with other problems and ideas opened up in Season 1 OR we could introduce a new issue like they do in every episode of Law and Order, where in the trial period new questions open up and maybe who we thought was guilty wasn't, or wasn't guilty in the SAME WAY we thought they were guilty. The possibilities are endless. But if I ever tackle a mystery, I really don't want to fall in the trap recent movies and tv shows have fallen into where they basically turn into an audience cock-tease.
TV: Twin Peaks
Finished season 1. Okay - the show loses SOME steam. I think the pilot and the first couple episodes are the best. For my taste, I would have liked the straight ahead mystery with the oddball idiosyncrasies established early on in the story versus the surreal, dream-like story elements. They don't resolve the murder of Laura Palmer, but this did not anger me like some fans of the Killing. I still feel as though I am in good hands with the story-tellers and suspect the story is going to be resolved. But I could be wrong. They ended the first season with an interesting twist.
Mystery on tv is a tricky thing. It seems to me, for the genre, you need to answer the whodunnit question. Twin Peaks easily could have offered an answer as to who killed Laura Palmer in the first season and then continued on. The second season could continue on with other problems and ideas opened up in Season 1 OR we could introduce a new issue like they do in every episode of Law and Order, where in the trial period new questions open up and maybe who we thought was guilty wasn't, or wasn't guilty in the SAME WAY we thought they were guilty. The possibilities are endless. But if I ever tackle a mystery, I really don't want to fall in the trap recent movies and tv shows have fallen into where they basically turn into an audience cock-tease.
Interesting Point
Ron Paul makes an interesting point about the sectors of the economy where the costs are completely bloated: home prices, college tuition, and healthcare - and what they all have in common - government involvement. Government backs mortgages, enables student loans, and provides Medicare and Medicaid and soon Obama care.
He makes a pretty simple argument right there for unintended consequences. Not sure if the healthcare thing holds up, though, because the costs were skyrocketing prior to government intervention.
Ron Paul makes an interesting point about the sectors of the economy where the costs are completely bloated: home prices, college tuition, and healthcare - and what they all have in common - government involvement. Government backs mortgages, enables student loans, and provides Medicare and Medicaid and soon Obama care.
He makes a pretty simple argument right there for unintended consequences. Not sure if the healthcare thing holds up, though, because the costs were skyrocketing prior to government intervention.
Republican Debate
Caught some of it tonight. First things first: Rick Perry. Good lord. He couldn't even remember the three federal agencies he wanted to abolish. He looked like a football player who didn't do his homework and needed to do an in-class presentation. His candidacy has got to be done. The guy cannot talk.
Bachman - crazy eyez Bachman. This women seems unscrupulous and doesn't answer the questions asked of her. She is pointless to listen to.
Santorum - is he even running? Guy can't get a word in. Less relevant than Bachman.
Newt - I liked hearing Newt's answers. The guy is obviously smart. I guess everyone thinks he's slimy and untrustworthy. Maybe I'm not paying close enough attention, cause I don't see it. He does seem a bit erudite, and I tend to think people like that are trying to hide something.
Romney - As a Democrat with independent and libertarian leanings, Romney seems to be the most sensible candidate. I listen to him when he speaks. He seems smart and capable.
Cain - I look forward to seeing what he's going to say and how he says it. I can't possibly take him seriously as a Presidential candidate. I actually don't think he is particularly bright or knowledgeable, but has a folksy charm and probably is the guy I'd most enjoy watching football with.
Ron Paul - Easily may favorite person to hear his point of view. Strangely principled and accurate on about 75% of things, but certain positions are waaaaay too impractical and border on being theoretical exercises as opposed to actual governing.
Huntsman - I can't quite understand why this guy isn't getting more serious attention. Almost like Romney, but comes across as more genuine and with a broader set of expertise. I like hearing his POV in the way I like hearing Romney's as he basically makes fundamental sense.
If I knew absolutely nothing and was just watching these in a vacuum, it seems like Romney and Huntsman are the only two true "Presidential" figures. Cain and Paul are entertaining sideshows. Bachman, Santorum, and Perry are jokes if you ask me. Newt is like the wise old uncle who seems a bit detached.
Caught some of it tonight. First things first: Rick Perry. Good lord. He couldn't even remember the three federal agencies he wanted to abolish. He looked like a football player who didn't do his homework and needed to do an in-class presentation. His candidacy has got to be done. The guy cannot talk.
Bachman - crazy eyez Bachman. This women seems unscrupulous and doesn't answer the questions asked of her. She is pointless to listen to.
Santorum - is he even running? Guy can't get a word in. Less relevant than Bachman.
Newt - I liked hearing Newt's answers. The guy is obviously smart. I guess everyone thinks he's slimy and untrustworthy. Maybe I'm not paying close enough attention, cause I don't see it. He does seem a bit erudite, and I tend to think people like that are trying to hide something.
Romney - As a Democrat with independent and libertarian leanings, Romney seems to be the most sensible candidate. I listen to him when he speaks. He seems smart and capable.
Cain - I look forward to seeing what he's going to say and how he says it. I can't possibly take him seriously as a Presidential candidate. I actually don't think he is particularly bright or knowledgeable, but has a folksy charm and probably is the guy I'd most enjoy watching football with.
Ron Paul - Easily may favorite person to hear his point of view. Strangely principled and accurate on about 75% of things, but certain positions are waaaaay too impractical and border on being theoretical exercises as opposed to actual governing.
Huntsman - I can't quite understand why this guy isn't getting more serious attention. Almost like Romney, but comes across as more genuine and with a broader set of expertise. I like hearing his POV in the way I like hearing Romney's as he basically makes fundamental sense.
If I knew absolutely nothing and was just watching these in a vacuum, it seems like Romney and Huntsman are the only two true "Presidential" figures. Cain and Paul are entertaining sideshows. Bachman, Santorum, and Perry are jokes if you ask me. Newt is like the wise old uncle who seems a bit detached.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)