Category: Local Page 3 of 35

Columns on local goings on could mean the Quad Cities of IA/IL (Moline, IL or Davenport, IA); Chicago; or Austin, Tx, since Connie spends parts of each year in those towns where she has homes. ‘Of local interest” could mean politics, opinion pieces, or business or entertainment-related subjects.

“Audrey” Has World Premiere at SXSW 2024

By Connie Wilson

On March 11, 2024

In Interviews, Local, Movies, Of Local (Quad Cities') Interest, Pop Culture, Reviews, Texas

“Audrey” at SXSW 2024.

First-time Australian feature director Natalie Bailey has crafted a tale of a dysfunctional family from a Lou Sanz script. It had its World Premiere at SXSW on March 10^th, 2024. The synopsis for the film : “Self-appointed Mother of the Year, Ronnie has given her daughter Audrey everything, so when Audrey selfishly falls into a coma, Ronnie has no choice but to keep their dreams alive by assuming her identity.”

BACKGROUND

Some background for what initially sounded like a comedy: Ronnie Willis Lipsick is the married mother of two daughters, Audrey and Norah. Norah, the youngest, has cerebral palsy. Audrey, the eldest, is a rebellious teenager who has a poor relationship with her mother.

Ronnie, portrayed by New Zealand actress Jackie VanBeek, won awards appearing as a young actress in “Jillaroo.” That was 18 years ago. Now, Ronnie seems to be attempting to live her life over through her daughter, Audrey. It isn’t going well.

Audrey (Josephine Blazier) , rather than appreciating her mother’s helicopter parenting, is a surly, sullen teenager with a bad attitude. Audrey’s rebelliousness brings comments from Mom like, “I don’t want you diddling away your time with boys,” Or, “The future is not something you find in the back seat of a car.” Audrey is fairly representative of 50% of American teenage daughters. (Trust me on this; I raised one).

AUDREY VERSUS NORAH

Norah and Audrey in “Audrey” (SXSW, 2024).

Audrey says things to her mother like, “You’re a shit actress, and you know it. You just quit before anyone else realized it.” Audrey also posts a video on her social media account ridiculing Mom that goes viral. It reduces Ronnie to tears.

Since Norah (Hannah Diviney) is confined to a wheelchair with muscular dystrophy, she is left alone by Mom. That may be why she comes off as the more likeable of the two sisters. Although Norah has her moments, as evidenced by her behavior when she sits bedside next to her comatose older sister in the hospital. Norah doesn’t express any affection for Audrey, even when encouraged by Mom.

Dad Cormack (Jeremy Lindsay Taylor) initially seems to be almost a non-factor in the family dynamic. As the plot progresses, Audrey falls from the roof and ends up in a coma; (not sure I’d use the adjective “selfishly.”) Cormack’s part takes on surprising new dimensions beyond the role of grieving father. He seems to be sexually out-of-control, in a kind of creepy fashion.

THE GOOD

Lou Sanz’s script had some great lines. My own personal favorites were: “If there’s one thing your Mom can do, it’s make a killer lemonade,” and “I’m going to take care of you, like any good mother would.”

The cinematography by Simon Ozilin is equally good, especially in the climactic scenes when the camera cuts from Ronnie playing Medea onstage (“Oh, doomed children of an unloved mother…”) to what is going on back at the house between Audrey and her friend Max.

THE BAD

“Audrey” and Mom Ronnie in the Australian film “Audrey” at SXSW.

The adult Ronnie misrepresents herself as her teen-aged daughter at an audition. That presents obvious problems. For Ronnie, trying to portray ages 13 through 25 is a stretch. Initially, I thought this would be addressed with an all-out comic tone.

However, the plot, described as “an exploration of the human psyche” never really goes for funny. It goes for (more-or-less) serious with a few comic situations. Again, not sure I’d say someone “selfishly” fell off a roof, but that sort of adjective choice in the synopsis led me to think this was going to be a funny movie.

TONE

For me, the subject matter didn’t really go far enough in either direction. It’s either going to be a light-hearted examination of the mother/daughter relationship when the daughter is difficult (think “Lady Bird”) or it’s going to be a serious, touching drama that examines the statement, “We need to take the time to acknowledge that our lives aren’t always as we would wish.” (“American Beauty”). It tries to keep a foot in both worlds.

I was at a performance of George Carlin’s in Chicago when Carlin was performing a sketch about suicide. (In his defense, it was near the end of his career and his health was not good.) The attempt to make comedy out of such a serious subject did not work. It caused many in the audience to streak for the exits.

The resolution of “Audrey” has the same problem. Despite some great scripted lines from Lou Sanz, when I asked Director Natalie Bailey about the film’s tone, she responded, “Morally, you have to choose where you stand. “ An interesting position, which reminds of this line from the script: “The world’s a broken place these days.”

CONCLUSION

Audrey's parents at the hospital after she falls from the roof.

“Audrey” at SXSW 2024.

I could relate to the situation the film explores. I’m the mother of a teenaged daughter (and was once a rebellious teenager, myself). However, I couldn’t embrace Ronnie walking away Scott-free at film’s end. Just as the audience for Carlin found his comic premise unacceptable, while I enjoyed the acting and the expert execution by this first-time feature director (especially the finale), I was disappointed by the moral position the film chose to take.

Maybe the recent court case in my home town area where a mother was found to have stuffed the dead body of her elementary school-aged son in a trash can in the garage for months played into my moral position. To say it was shocking is putting it mildly. The resolution of that case (in Rock Island, IL) did not point to child abuse or murder, however, as the death itself seems to have been an accident that the mother was made aware of (child playing with gun) only after the fact. She wasn’t even home when it happened. Still, respect for life and protecting one’s child at all costs and—if the worst happens—providing a decent burial or decent treatment for the youngster seemed the least a parent (no matter how shocked or unprepared for the event) should do. Somehow, a different ending for this one seemed like a better (or more acceptable?) idea.

(Whatever happened to happy endings?)

TV Pilots Screen at SXSW on Oscar Day, March 10, 2024

By Connie Wilson

On March 11, 2024

In Humor and Weird Wilson-isms, Local, Movies, Of Local (Quad Cities') Interest, Pop Culture, Reviews, Television, Texas

The TV pilot section at SXSW went off at 3 p.m. at the Alamo Drafthouse on South Lamar on Oscar Day (March 10th), with six TV pilot episodes shown, one after another. I did not realize that the program was comprised of all six of the entrants. I was originally focused on one entitled “Bettendorf Talks.”

Some of the many TV Pilot participants, post March 10th screening.

I may be the only critic here who owned and operated the Best Business in Bettendorf (Iowa) for close to 20 years, so, naturally, I was intrigued by the title alone. I looked up the creators of this TV pilot and contacted (via e-mail) one (of two) of the leads, a very good actor named David Pasquesi, whom I have seen perform in Chicago. He does improv with his partner, T.J. Jagodowski,—the leads in the TV pilot— but he also acts in other vehicles. He was impressive portraying a brain-damaged pianist in a short that screened at the Windy City Film Festival the same year I had a screenplay in competition.

My e-mail mentioned that I had seen him in that short and I received a friendly response, that suggested he hoped we might meet in Austin. He said he was “looping in” a publicist who was representing the pilot.

I had asked for a screener but was told (by the star) that it was “a World Premiere.” Most of the films here are World Premieres. Generally, a screener is sent with an embargo date and time, which I always abide by. I did ultimately receive the 18-minute film. Since I was not aware that ALL six of the films would be showing at once, I prepared remarks for just “Bettendorf Talks,” which I will conscientiously review tomorrow.

I was so enthused about helping publicize the existence of a pilot that might highlight the Quad Cities that I invited the two leads to dinner at my expense, at a very nice downtown restaurant, the Roaring Fork. That invitation was sent (e-mail) on February 22^nd. I have only invited one other individual to join me for a meal so I could do an in-depth interview ever in over half a century. That one person was Suzanne Weinert. Here is the link to that piece: https://www.themovieblog.com/2019/04/writer-producer-director-suzanne-weinert-flatiron-pictures-talks-movies-and-a-good-son/

That is not to say that I have never done interviews that were conducted in spaces provided. Last year, I interviewed the leads of “A Small Light,” a National Geographic special.

My intention for “Bettendorf Talks” was different.

I wanted to run a lengthy article on “Bettendorf Talks” and its stars and their background(s). I wanted to help launch “Bettendorf Talks” and I had some Bettendorf stories that the team might be able to use if their pilot were to be picked up.

I literally never heard another word back from anyone, so that plan died. I’m sure the team was busy and may not have even been in town. A note to that effect would have been nice, but I was busy covering “Stormy” on Opening Night, anyway, and it ran late.

The short observations below are in the order of which were the best of the pilots screened this afternoon:

“Halfrican American” TV Pilot.

“Halfrican American” – This one came from real life, said its Showrunner/Director/Screenwriter, Zeke Nicholson. The short synopsis in the program said, “Zeke attends a cookout with his boisterous black family and estranged father.” Zeke is from New York, but not THAT New York. As he tells his assembled relatives, he is from Reinbeck. New York, a small town upstate. When his dad asks him what they do in Reinbeck, Zeke mentions antiquing. His father’s hilarious response is “that shit sounds white.” Zeke has already admitted that the most exciting thing that ever happened in Reinbeck is that Chelsea Clinton got married there. Among other laugh-out-loud funny moments were his description of an old photo of himself from high school with chin hair and sideburns as “a chin-strap situation,” admitting that “It kind of looked like a helmet I couldn’t take off.” Zeke meets a sister named Destiny he didn’t know he had (“I don’t meet a new sister every day”) and asks her to help “explain the proper hand service” to him, as he doesn’t seem to have the Black hand signals down completely. There were also jokes about colonoscopies and 6-hour erections, but I’ll leave the shit jokes (quite numerous in the two best pilots) for later, with this one exception: Zeke’s father expresses some opinions about California, a state, he says, where people “howl at the moon.” Walt goes even further suggesting that it’s a place where anything goes, saying, “You could eat your neighbor’s shit and somebody will join you.”

See what I mean?

The cast was vibrant, funny, lively and the concept seems like one that would “play” well on television today—with some censorship of the racier parts. It was definitely an “A” effort.

There’s actually a tie for the two that were second-best, based on today’s viewing:

“Bettendorf Talks” and “Tossers” seemed equally funny, but I had prepared remarks for “Bettendorf Talks” only.

“Bettendorf Talks” cast.

This was because I didn’t realize that ALL the pilots would screen one right after another. Also, I thought I might have an opportunity to ask questions of the Bettendorf duo, such as, “Who is the person on your writing team that actually knows the Quad Cities?” There’s always someone. The two young men who created “A Quiet Place” (Scott Beck and Bryan Woods) are from Bettendorf and that film has now become a franchise with John Krasinski at the helm. So make fun of Bettendorf all you want. I don’t live there, and I didn’t grow up there. Go for it, but be funny and witty. I would also mention that the WQAD television station isn’t in East Moline; it’s in Moline. Logomarcino’s? Also in Moline—but this is fine, since we are all “joined by a river”—right? After all, when they shot “Cedar Rapids” (Ed Helms) they used Pittsburgh as a stand-in for C.R.

Let me mention the Top Two pilots (“Halfrican American,” above, and “Bettendorf Talks”) and resume with lengthier descriptions of the others tomorrow, since it’s Oscar night and it’s now after 3 a.m. While conducting our annual Oscar Night Party I received a terse text message from the publicist for “Bettendorf Talks.” It was a little after 6:30 p.m.

My boss (from New York City) and the only one that I am aware of who sets the time(s) for reviews to go live on his blog, is here in Austin. His e-mail is now sporting a message that he is “away from his desk.” We have not spoken or seen one another. I know that he was on the Red Carpet for “Roadhouse” on Friday, because I read it on TMB. He is basically unable to be reached by me or anyone else. I know he is busy, because I am busy (although I did set aside tonight for the annual Oscar predicting party, with ballots, a traveling trophy, friends and snacks.)

Keep in mind that we mere reviewer types have been laboring in the fields, attempting to get screeners in order to get a head start on all the activity. I filed at least 10 such reviews from screeners and clearly indicated all “embargo” dates and times. When I was accused of running a review of one such documentary less than an hour earlier than the time it was to go “live” (7:30 CDT), via a brusque message from the publicist’s cell phone,I responded that I did not set the timing of the run on that blog; it’s not my job. I did not, consciously or unconsciously, violate any embargo. It was also, at most, a one hour discrepancy. (If you’re trying to go early, wouldn’t you jump the gun by more than a few minutes?) I offered a potential explanation on behalf of whoever did set the blog to automatically post. It would have been done in NYC, which is Eastern Time versus Central Time and today was the day the clocks changed. But I sense that the goal was really something quite different from what we will laughingly call “public relations.”

“Bettendorf Talks” leads T.J. Jagodowski and David Pasquesi after the March 10th TV Pilot showing.

I offered up this evidence of my own innocence:

(1) It was NOT up on MY smaller blog, WeeklyWilson at the time of the brusque message, which proves my point. I DO set times for that one, but am only one contributor of many on TMB.

(2) The boss operates on Eastern Standard Time, normally, but today was the day that we “spring forward” with daylight savings time here in Central Daylight Time. Either one could account for going “live” very slightly early. The point is, it was a really nice review (and a big one) and I do not set the time that things run on TMB. I wish I did, but I do not have that power. It’s well above my pay grade. If it did run slightly earlier than intended, it was accidental and—if you check—there is publicity on the piece well back in the month from other sources (interviews, etc.). Was it really a good and/or nice thing to call me up and give me grief?

If it were my film, I’d want as much free P.R. as I could get. The best way to get it is to get reviewers the materials when they actually have time to prepare their words well and, yes, it can be embargoed and everyone should attempt to comply. I, at least, definitely did comply.

(3) I have not been able to speak with the very busy Boss Man since he hit town. I tried sending an e-mail, but got the “away from the desk” thing. Phone messages are going straight to voice mail.

The publicist suggested I should do what I could to take the very nice, very large review down immediately. If it were my film, I would most definitely not want that. (*Note: the review was not of “Bettendorf Talks.”)

I instantly agreed that I would do what I could, which is nothing.

David Pasquesi of “Bettendorf Talks.”

I have never been the one who sets the “run” time for The Movie Blog’s pieces. I only can be held responsible for my own little blog, which clearly had been in compliance. If it was one hour “off,” I’m guessing it is because it was set to run automatically quite some time ago.

Man! I guess I don’t understand what a Public Relations person is supposed to try to do, even though I worked in that capacity for many years as the CEO of two companies. Harassing me at home while I’m having an Oscar party and accusing me of something I did not do never seemed like it would be high on the list of “things I should do to promote.” Asking a large blog to remove an excellent review that goes out to a large audience also seems counter-productive if you’re working to promote the film. Of course it would be bad to intentionally violate embargo dates and times, but that did not happen.

I always thought P.R. people were supposed to concentrate on trying to create good will. No?i

(Post Script: I checked the Premiere time for the review in question. It started at 6 p.m. and went until 7:36 p.m. This means that the film was well underway when I received the phone message that I must remove it from being read. On Oscar night. While throwing an Oscar party. Anyone going to the movie was already in the film. It had been going on for over half an hour, at least. If I’m this film’s publicist, I am exulting at the good reviews, not telling big outlets to take them down. Maybe I’ve been doing P.R. wrong for half a century, but I would definitely be out celebrating (as, in fact, I was trying to do here in Austin) at the good reviews my efforts had produced and not hassling an underpaid reviewer for jumping the gun on a review by less than an hour,— especially when setting the time to run the review was not even the reviewer’s job.

How DJT Was Groomed By Russia; The Tragic End of Alexei Navalny

By Connie Wilson

On February 17, 2024

In Editorial, Essays on Politics: Best Political Essays & Ideology, Local, News, Of Local (Quad Cities') Interest, Politics, Uncategorized

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXSVsfARLdk

“Porcelain War” Is Documentary Grand Jury Winner at Sundance, 2024

By Connie Wilson

On February 5, 2024

In Local, Movies, Music, News, Politics, Reviews

“Porcelain War” won the Grand Jury prize at Sundance 2024 and added to the ever-proliferating number of documentaries that are coming out of the horrific Russia/Ukraine War. The front-runner for an Oscar in the upcoming Academy Awards is “20 Days in Mariupol” from Ukrainian journalist Mstyslav Chernov. The “Porcelain War” is a joint project from Brendan Bellomo of the United States and Slava Leontyev, shooting inside Ukraine. Close friend Andrey Stefanov served as cameraman for the sequences within Ukraine and he and Slava deserve great admiration for their courage and resolve under pressure.

Having just seen “20 Days at Mariupol,” comparisons, for me, were inescapable. Plus, I am currently mid-way through a course at the University of Texas that traces Putin’s rise to power, leading to today’s invasion of Ukraine and the war that has dragged on since February 2022.

Both films show the “before” and “after” of a beautiful country now reduced to rubble. In the case of Mariupol (available on most major platforms and a “must see”) we see the city of Mariupol before it is totally ravaged by the Russians. The Writer/Director of “20 Days at Mariupol,” a Ukrainian AP reporter, chose to stay on with the troops and depict the true horrors of those left behind, including the young boy who was shooting baskets outdoors when a missile blew off his legs, ultimately killing him. The blood and grief mirror the scenes in Gaza that are horrifying in their brutality.

“Porcelain War” uses the metaphor of porcelain, which, as the film drives home relentlessly is this:

“Ukraine is like porcelain — easy to break, but impossible to destroy.”

This is because the Ukrainian participants we become acquainted with are artists who work in porcelain.

The United States director, Brendan Bellomo, won a student Academy Award when he was a student at NYU and his expertise is quite evident here.

THE BAD

Cast of “Porcelain War,” including co-directors (front) and Frodo, the dog..

For me, it is the very slickness of the porcelain metaphor and the well-done visual effects in “Porcelain War” that detract when compared with the effect that the raw footage of “20 Days in Mariupol” evokes. There is somewhat a looking away from the horrors of war a bit more in “Porcelain War” than in the shorter “20 Days in Mariupol” film. In “Porcelain War” we see idyllic footage of Ukrainian artists Slava, Anya, and Andrey coping with life in a war zone but also surrounded by great beauty. As “Variety” said in its review, “An accomplished visual effects supervisor whose credits include the 2012 Sundance smash ‘Beasts of the Southern Wild,’ Bellomo is attuned to the jolting sensations of combat both on the ground and above it.” It is precisely the excellence of Bellomo’s visual work in depicting the porcelain figures that takes away slightly from the less polished, but more visceral power of the shorter film (“20 Days in Mariupol.”) The porcelain work is beautiful and delicate. I, for one, wanted more of the brutal truth of war in Ukraine, to help me understand and process this latest aggression.

We do learn about the history of Russia’s land grab of Crimea in 2014. Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons in exchange for promises of non-aggression from Russia, but those promises were bogus. Russia has a long history of not living up to its word. Putin seized Crimea in 2014 and collaborating director Slava Leontyev lived in Crimea at the time. He moved to Ukraine and he and others began re-establishing the military that they had abandoned when they believed Russia’s promises. So, for the past 10 years there has been an attempt to re-establish some kind of defense system for Ukraine, and Slava—who was present at Sundance along with Frodo, the dog in the film— has been instrumental in that effort, as we see.

A recent “New York Times” article speculated on the outcome of the Ukraine/Russia conflict. It said the Russian defense of parts of Ukraine it now occupies currently seems impenetrable. The war, it said, is beginning to resemble the WWI stalemate during which neither side seemed able to advance and the human toll inexorably rose. The article stated that Ukraine has lost 20% of its area and wants ALL of its country back. The odds of that happening (on Russia’s part) don’t seem good. With the Republican support for Ukraine seemingly mired in political gamesmanship that might re-install a leader who seems to think emulating Putin is a good thing, can we assume that our technical support and weaponry, that allowed Ukraine early in the fight to score some impressive wins, will continue after the November election if Trump were to win?

United States financial aid and expertise is necessary for Ukraine to move forward; there was a mention in the article of the potential firing of the Ukrainian Minister of Defense by Zelenskyy. If he IS fired, he was said to be the chief rival who might run against Zelenskyy. If Russia is feeling the crunch and would agree to settlement talks, said the article, it would almost certainly be predicated on Ukraine not joining NATO or other such groups. Meanwhile, Russia recruits from prison and will march those men forward to certain death simply to find out where their adversaries are concealed. The brutality of the Russian troops is legendary. The firsthand accounts of what has occurred are absolutely sickening; that, too, is not likely to improve over time.

Nobody trusts Putin to honor agreements he makes. The general feeling that would come from such a “settlement” would be anger that so many Ukrainians have given so much only to potentially be given back only a portion of their native land with conditions on how they might best defend themselves against future Russian aggression. The odds for the West and for democracy and for Europe are very large if you accept the premise that Putin will never stop his characteristic aggressive behavior and his dream of re-establishing the USSR as a Super Power. And, although Putin is 71, is a successor likely to be a change for the better? (Unlikely).

Ukraine’s largest military aid partner since the start of the war, the United States, has committed a total of €71.4 billion in aid to Ukraine when also considering financial and humanitarian support. Martin Armstrong on “Statista” (Dec. 13,2023) had these figures of support for Ukraine:

“Thanks chiefly to the €77.1 billion in pledged financial aid, European Union institutions are the largest aid donors to Ukraine. This is based on data from the IfW Kiel Ukraine Support Tracker which currently covers the period January 24, 2022 to October 31, 2023.

But will U.S. aid continue if Donald J. Trump is elected? And if Biden remains president, can he successfully negotiate continued support with the current GOP House and with the Senate’s current iteration?

All of these considerations enter into election year 2024. The analogy of porcelain (“Easy to break, but impossible to destroy”) may weaken in its appropriateness with the conflagration dragging on.

THE GOOD

Slava Leonytev is shown holding Frodo, the dog, with the cast of "Porcelain War."

Entire cast of “Porcelain War,” many of them direct from Ukraine.

Slava Leontyev became a weapons expert and has been training other civilians in how to load and fire weapons, in preparation for the war that Ukraine feared was coming. As one of the characters says, alluding to Russia’s history of aggression against the nations that broke away, “After 400 years we’re going to finally take care of it.” From watching Slava at work as a Ukrainian defense officer we get a better understanding of the reality of the current war.

The action in “Porcelain War” is centered in Kharkiv, which is 25 miles from the Russian border. In “Porcelain War,” we get to see the nuts-and-bolts of fighting the war in Ukraine. The emphasis on drone use is shown. We see “ordinary people in extraordinary situations” learning to fire weapons. We don’t see as much of the blood and guts and heartbreaking grief as in “20 Days in Mariupol,” but the horror of war is ubiquitous, emphasizing the message.

One line in the film is “Because of the invasion, we lost the substance of our lives.” Another analogy is that refugees are like snails without their shells. As Anya and Sonya are sent to Lithuania for their safety, their parents describe what an ordeal it was to get the girls out of the country by way of Poland. It reminded me of London residents, during the Blitz, sending their children to the countryside to protect them. As the family says, “What is absolutely predictable is death.” We see face-time chats between the family members. The Ukraine residents feel that, “We’re fighting against evil. This is a historic opportunity to destroy aggressors.” The script adds, “It will keep pushing until it reaches you.”

The music is particularly effective. It is a fevered, clattering score from DakhaBrakha, a self-described “ethnic chaos” band based in Kyiv. The musical refrain is “A time to laugh, a time to cry. A time to live. A time to die.”

This film gives us a focused look at how the local populace, with aid from the United States and the European Union, is responding to Russian aggression. As Slava says, “Crimea ended in the blink of an eye, and we retreated to Ukraine.” At another point, as the struggle drags on, the line is “Armageddon is happening in Bakhmut.”

The drone group, decorated by the local artists, is dubbed “Saigon.” The reference to that Vietnamese city seems to be a nod to the effective guerilla fighting that the local populace employed against a super power.

CONCLUSION:

This is a film that is well worth watching. I would suggest viewing “20 Days in Mariupol” at the same time. One will give a very polished look at the Ukraine/Russia war; the other is more visceral, but both are terrific.

The Eagles with Steely Dan in Austin at the Moody Center on Feb. 3, 2024

By Connie Wilson

On February 4, 2024

In Local, Music, News, Pop Culture, Texas

“Little Death” Screens at Sundance, 2024

By Connie Wilson

On February 3, 2024

In Local, Movies, Of Local (Quad Cities') Interest, Pop Culture, Reviews

“Little Death” won the NEXT innovator award at Sundance, 2024. I was attracted to this film by the fact that Protozoa Pictures was involved (Darren Aranofsky) and that it had David Schwimmer, Gaby Hoffman, Jenna Malone and Seth Green among the cast members. The director was Jack Begert, who co-wrote it with Dani Goffstein. Another executive producer was Andy Cohen.

The synopsis described the film this way: “A middle-aged filmmaker on the verge of a breakthrough. Two kids in search of a lost backpack. A small dog a long way from home.”

That description of the film’s plot didn’t pin down the story much, and the actual unfolding of the plot was only minimally helpful. There is a young girl who has had her car hijacked and must seek help. There is David Schwimmer (the frustrated filmmaker) who is trying hard to get a green light for his film project. It’s not a particularly tight, well-written, or thoughtful script.

In a conference, the Powers-That-Be at the studio tell screenwriter Martin (David Schwimmer) that he should consider changing the gender of his lead character, [who, it should be noted, is largely autobiographical.] Martin is understandably reluctant to change the sex of his lead character from male to female, but, in a meeting with the studio Big Whigs, he becomes convinced that it will be easy to simply change “Dan” to “Danielle. It’s a deal-breaker. So, he complies.

This means that, halfway through the film, the audience loses David Schwimmer as the lead actor because he is replaced by Gaby Hoffman, who started her film career in 1989’s “Field of Dreams” as the young Karen Kinsella. There is no explanation of this sudden loss, other than Gaby’s appearance.

I found it interesting to see the male character morph into a female lead without so much as a word of explanation, and I was not put off by the visual effects that bothered one other critic, who said this: “The performances were messy and their characters are really unlikeable and aggravating in the worst way. Each character comes close to wanting to pull your hair out of your head levels.
Begert approach on the humor is poor, the editing and musical choices are annoying, and the dialogue is forced, unfunny, and poorly constructed. There are some really awful visual presentations and animations throughout. To top it off, the animations were AI-generated which honestly is a major slap on the face for independent filmmakers and artists. It’s insulting that Sundance allowed this movie to come into the festival.”

Well. That certainly is one point of view.

I do agree that the film seems, overall, poorly organized. The plot is random and doesn’t tie together well. The “visual effects” that this anonymous critic mentions (no name is attached on the IMDB.com page) were primitive when one considers that Protozoa was behind the film.

Cinematography was by Christopher Ripley.

Overall, I was sad to see Schwimmer go, as the lead, to be replaced by Gaby Hoffman. It wasn’t my favorite film of the eight I am reviewing, and it had problems, but I’m more accepting of it than Mr. Anonymous Reviewer.

Reflections on Barbra Streisand’s Autobiography “My Name Is Barbra”

By Connie Wilson

On January 19, 2024

In Books, Editorial, Local, Movies, Music, News, Of Local (Quad Cities') Interest, Politics, Pop Culture, Reviews

Barbra Streisand & Husband James Brolin.

Has unresolved issues about her mother.
Has issues regarding a “father figure.”
Somewhat downplays the gift her voice has been to her life path.
Seems to have OCD tendencies, even as to placement of flowers.
Naturally curious.
Seems to have built a “family” from those she found more supportive of her.
Takes a few swipes at good old “Marty” (her manager),and at Mandy Patimken and others. Seems to want to portray herself as someone who others were constantly seeking for intimacy, yet she doesn’t share much about her “lovers.” In fact, she seems to be rather coy about whether or not a certain famous individual was or was not someone with whom she shared physical intimacy.
James Newton Howard seems to re-surface as someone who had a crush on her.
The Jon Peters guy sounds like a real shyster and opportunist, and that seems to have been how he was viewed by the Hollywood community, as well.
Loyalty to Prince—now King—Charles and to Pierre Trudeau. Probably explains her views on Meghan Markle, recently articulated.
Doesn’t say much about Elliott Gould, with whom she shares her son, Jason. Kind of implies that they just drifted apart, he wasn’t good-looking enough, and he had a gambling problem and possibly a drug problem later in life. Discusses Jason’s homosexuality in passing and claims he has a phenomenal voice. Jason is now 58 years old and, while he did release an album some years ago and sang with his mother on one of her tours, he doesn’t seem to have done much creating, musically speaking.
Seems to have found a man in James Brolin who can take her independent attitude in stride.
Starred or appeared in 19 films, but sounds like she is done.
Music seems to be the thing that she might continue doing to the bitter end, a la Tony Bennett, especially if it doesn’t involve touring or appearing in person.
Very detail oriented, to the point that would drive many people insane. (Lighting, rewriting lyrics, etc.). She actually requested that famous songwriters like Stephen Sondheim rewrite song lyrics for various reasons and other “pushy” things.
Tells some interesting stories about her famous friends (Donna Karan is one, Prince Charles, Secretary of State Madeline Albright, the Clintons) but doesn’t really dish much new dirt. Before I read the book, the Big Story seemed to be her rejecting Mandy Patimkin as a potential fling, saying she did not find him attractive. The truth hurts, but good for you, Barbara. [Nobody finds Mandy Patimkin attractive.]
Mandy Patimken.

*Barbra’s father, Emmanuel Streisand, died at 35 and she was told by her cold mother that she kept waiting for him to return for days, sitting by the window. In her own words, “In some ways, I’m still waiting.”

*Her book is dedicated this way: “This book is dedicated to the father I never knew, and the mother I did…” She, basically, says she loved her mother but she didn’t “like” her. Her mother seems to have had serious jealousy issues about Barbra’s phenomenal success and hurt her many times, both intentionally and unintentionally. Fortunately, Babs bonded with many women who were older than she is and they served as “surrogate” mothers. One of the more famous was Bill Clinton’s mother.

*She talks about how she doesn’t really take care of her voice and doesn’t like to warm up, etc. She also has crippling stage fright, brought on by having forgotten the words to a song while performing at a free concert in Central Park.

*Outspoken – Recently, Babs came out swinging against Megan Markle. She criticized everything about the woman, from her acting prowess to her relationship with the Royal Family. It has made all the tabloids and seems to be a throwback to her great friendship with King Charles and loyalty to him. Barbara doesn’t say that she and Charles had “a fling,” but she tells a semi-racy story about his dog coming in to get in bed with her one morning when she is visiting England.

Barbra Streisand with her only child, Jason Gould (age 58).

Jason Gould and Mom Barbra Streisand.

*The Jon Peters romance (he was her hairdresser) was one of the chapters in her life that she attributes to her “hippy” phase. He sounds like a real piece of work! He is portrayed in the movie “Licorice Pizza” and it isn’t pretty. He did rise to become the head of a studio, but he sounds like a real insecure opportunist. One thing that attracted her to him was that they both had sons about the same age.

*Barbra seems to have a fairly ruthless way of dealing with disloyalty. In her own words, “When I’m done with something, I’m done!” She describes cutting Agent Sue Mengers out of her life when she suspected that the woman had leaked some things to the media.

*She reveals that she has heard weird noises in her head since childhood.

*Several times in the book Barbra repeats this line from George Bernard Shaw’s play “St. Joan:” “It is an old saying that he who tells too much truth is sure to be hanged.” She also says, “I’ve always believed in telling the truth, but it has gotten me in trouble over the years.” We saw Barbra in concert in Chicago right before a presidential election and her remarks to the audience supportive of the Democratic candidate caused the couple next to us to yell (loudly), “Just shut up and sing.” I happen to agree with most of her political opinions, so I’m not one of the MAGA crowd who would be this rude. It was an “okay” concert, but it was not the Experience of a Lifetime I had hoped it might be, as I had been a fan for years.

*The book goes down easy and is a good read, but she goes into detail after detail after detail about every outfit she ever wore in her life, which reminded me of my own dear mother, who resembled Barbra’s mom in that she was not one to praise or express warm, fuzzy things, but I have tried to understand her chilly treatment of me in light of her own career and its demands. Barbra has had years of therapy and she tries to be even-handed about her mother’s indifference or jealousy towards her.

There is no question that Barbra Streisand is a formidable talent. She is a lot. I love her singing; I like most of her movies, so I enjoyed reading the behind-the-scenes stuff but I felt she put entirely too much time describing every outfit she ever wore in her life and casting herself in the most positive light possible, with all kinds of effusive notes of praise and uber-flattering photos.

“The Iron Claw” Revisits Pro Wrestling’s Von Erich Family

By Connie Wilson

On January 15, 2024

In Local, Movies, Pop Culture, Reviews, Texas

Since (Scott) Beck & (Bryan) Woods selected “The Iron Claw” to open their new Davenport (Iowa) theater, and it is doing well at the box office, while Jeremy Allen White is really gaining steam as a leading man, I went to see “The Iron Claw” here in Texas. Texas is definitely Von Erich territory, site of the Dallas Sportatorium where much of the wrestling matches of yesteryear took place. (“Please note: There will be spoilers.)

“The Iron Claw” recounts the mostly “true story of the inseparable Von Erich brothers, who made history in the intensely competitive world of professional wrestling in the early 1980s. Through tragedy and triumph, under the shadow of their domineering father and coach, the brothers seek larger-than-life immortality on the biggest stage in sports.” “The Iron Claw” is the mostly true story of a wrestling family whose real surname was Adkinsson. Their stage name in the wrestling world was Von Erich. Jack Barton Adkisson wrestled under the name Fritz Von Erich and then encouraged his sons, Kerry, Kevin, David and Michael, to follow him into the ring. (*Son Chris also wrestled, but less successfully than his brothers, and is not depicted in this film, for reasons that don’t seem to make sense.)

CAST

Written and directed by Sean Durkin (“Martha Marcy May Marlene” and TV’s “Dead Ringers”), “The Iron Claw” stars Zac Efron (“High School Musical 3: Senior Year”); Jeremy Allen White, who first came to my attention as the character Lip (Philip) in the television series “Shameless;” and Maura Tierney of “The Affair.” Holt McAllany (“Mindhunter,” “Fight Club”) was the standout for me, and when you check out his credits, that is not surprising. Lily James as Pam, Kevin’s wife, is also very good, and Bill Mercer as Michael J. Harney is also good in his part.

However, I came to see Jeremy Allen White, and for more than an hour, I thought I’d walked into the wrong movie.

Jeremy Allen White is hot, right now, as the star of the television series “The Bear.” He walked off with the Golden Globe and the Critics Choice awards in the past week. You really get the feeling that Jeremy is slated for great things dramatically. This film, unfortunately, doesn’t give him that much to do. He doesn’t have the physicality of Zac Efron, but, considering the lengths to which Zac Efron went, maybe that is a good thing. Jeremy admitted on the late night talk shows that he was a novice to the wrestling world. (He gave much credit to Chavo Guerrero, who both instructed the non-wrestlers in the cast and portrayed the character The Iron Sheikh.)

The two other brothers we see portrayed onscreen are David Von Erich (Harris Dickinson of “Beach Rats”) and Michael Von Erich (Stanley Simons, “Angelfish”).

FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE

According to Wikipedia, Fritz and wife Doris had six sons: Jack Barton Jr. (September 21, 1952 – March 7, 1959), Kevin (born May 15, 1957), David (July 22, 1958 – February 10, 1984), Kerry (February 3, 1960 – February 18, 1993), Mike (March 2, 1964 – April 12, 1987) and Chris (September 30, 1969 – September 12, 1991). Of Adkisson’s six sons, Kevin was the only one still living by the time Adkisson died in 1997.

The couple later separated and Doris divorced her husband on July 21, 1992 after 42 years of marriage.” The movie didn’t make any mention of the exact manner in which the couple’s first child, Jack Jr., died, but Wikipedia says that it was an accidental electrocution and drowning when the child was just 7 years old. The movie also did not mention the youngest child, Chris, and the couple’s divorce after 42 years of marriage was also glossed over. (Adkisson died of lung and brain cancer just 5 years after the divorce.)

PLOT

Kevin Von Erich, the only surviving Von Erich brother.

The movie references the fact that the family is cursed.

As the plot unfolds, it seems to be more a case of the overbearing father’s parenting techniques than of a curse. Kevin’s wife, Pamela says there is a belief in good or bad luck and then there is the belief that we make our own luck. It seems that the constant emphasis on being the best and being strong and winning drove three of his sons to kill themselves. The script repeatedly articulates this thought:“If we were the toughest, the strongest, the most successful, nothing could ever hurt us.” That turns out to be bad advice, and the underlying message seems to be that men should be allowed to have a vulnerable, sensitive side.

There were some things in the film that were murky. For instance, did Daddy Fritz embezzle money, either from his hard-working sons or from the promoters who underwrote his wrestling emporium? Why did writer/director Sean Durkin decide to leave the youngest son, Chris—who also committed suicide at 21—out of the movie? Yes, I read that he thought 3 sons who killed themselves was just one too many, but Chris, the baby, had the most cause, as he didn’t have the physical gifts of his older brothers and was struggling to fit in. That would seem to have been a good plot point, as the four brothers who were better known were generally gifted athletes. In fact, Kerry (Jeremy Allen White) is only shown joining the family business after Jimmy Carter took the U.S. out of the 1982 Olympics and, therefore, destroyed Kerry’s hopes of going to the Olympics as a discus competitor.

For that matter, why didn’t he give Doris, portrayed by seasoned veteran Maura Tierney (“The Affair”) more dramatic eulogy scenes at any of the funerals for her sons? Maura Tierney could have hit that ball out of the park. Instead, she has a very pedestrian part that could have been so much more. Opportunity lost.

Was son Kerry’s motorcycle accident no more than that? The way it is portrayed in the film, it looks like that might also have been a suicidal gesture. And brother David’s (Harris Dickinson) insistence that he is “okay” when he is vomiting blood also seemed self-destructive and suicidal. (He dies in Japan from a ruptured intestine.)

I was surprised that Jeremy Allen White didn’t appear in the film until roughly an hour into the 2 hour 12 minute movie. Jeremy Allen White is white-hot right now, coming off his Golden Globe, Critics Choice and Emmy wins for his lead role in “The Bear.”

The actor who impressed me the most was not any of those who got top billing, but Holt McCallany who played the boys’ father. He was awesome. While everyone was impressed by how ripped Zac Efron appeared as Kevin Von Erich, at only 5’ 8” he looked too animalistic for my tastes. The other actors portraying the Von Erich brothers appeared more “normal” in appearance.

I also thought the “meeting in heaven” was odd. It’s nice to have a happy ending, but the failure to portray one dead brother (Chris) at all just made it seem weird, to me.

I was never much of a pro wrestling fan, but I enjoyed the film. Also a small shout-out to Aaron Dean Eisenberg, who portrayed Ric Flair with—-well, flair. He was a hoot.

Iowa Caucuses (Jan. 15, 2024) Will Set Low Temperature Records

By Connie Wilson

On January 14, 2024

In Essays on Politics: Best Political Essays & Ideology, Local, News, Of Local (Quad Cities') Interest, Politics, Television

CNN Republican Presidential Debate (final one)

I am thinking back to the Iowa Caucus nights in 2004, 2008 and 2012that my college roommate and I went out to caucus at a local Des Moines high school when the temperature was 17 degrees (2004). It was, until now, the coldest caucus night in history. My hope was that Howard Dean was going to prevail, as he had been leading during the “sleepless summer,” as the press called it.

I dropped her off at the doorway and then had to drive blocks away to park my car. During that time, those in charge attempted to close the doors to late-comers, but she stood by the door to allow me to gain access. (They said they were running out of GOP ballots, for one thing.) Then we were thrown into the chaos of the classroom, with Democratic groups milling about trying to achieve the 15% viability that would allow them to continue. (The Republicans use paper ballots, but the Democrats, at that time, simply stand around in small clumps of people and it is sheer lunacy.)

The 2020 SNAFU in Iowa, when the results weren’t know for days, led to the resignation of the guy in charge, even though there still is debate as to whether an app called Shadow, Inc., developed by someone named Tara McGowan, was at fault. There were charges that both the Buttigieg campaign and the Hillary Clinton campaign had had dealings with the company that developed the app. The entire night was catastrophic for the Iowa caucuses and, this year, the Dems did not come. When you read that 8 precinct results went missing in 2012 and were never counted, you begin to get the idea that this entire throwback town hall meeting thing will soon cease. After all, the success rate of predicting who the standard bearer for each candidate will be is not great. The success rate for predicting the Democratic winner nationally is only 55% and for the GOP it is only 43%.

Is it any wonder that voices are being raised saying the caucuses in Iowa don’t “work” and should go the way of the Dodo bird? Illinois Senator Dick Durbin said, “I think the Democratic caucus in Iowa is a quirky, quaint tradition which should come to an end. As we try to make voting easier for people across America, the Iowa caucus is the most painful situation we currently face for voting.” Former presidential candidate Julian Castro said, “It’s a mess. What we saw out there and heard about are, consistently, errors in the way that this process was done, whether in the initial phase or the realignment. Inconsistencies in how it was done across precinct sites. It is a total mess.” And let’s not forget that campaigning in Iowa is probably not real pleasant when the weather in the Midwest doesn’t cooperate. DeSantis and Trump are from Florida. Haley is from South Carolina. Talk about culture shock!

So, how did this “total mess” come to be at all?

Nikki Haley on the GOP debate stage

One book written on the topic (“The Iowa Caucuses and the Presidential Nominating Process” by Peverill Squire of the University of Missouri) says, “Iowa became first in the nation pretty much as an accident of the calendar.” One explanation even blames the entire thing on the slow duplicating machine that Iowa used at the time, which required Iowa to set their voting date up earlier and earlier to make sure that materials could be turned out in time. Supposedly, the party wasn’t really angling to be “first in the nation” but that’s what happened.

As for the GOP, they used to use an August “straw poll” thing, which turned out to be totally unreliable and was discontinued. It became a question of who could buy the straw poll. You could argue that that is also true of the caucuses as they now exist, with huge amounts of money being spent by the candidates running in the state. It is easy to see why a state like Iowa would want to continue being the center of attention and raking in advertising (and other) dollars. But will that happen, given the deep freeze that Iowa is going to be on the night of the caucuses this year? Thirty and Forty below zero is life-threatening. Iowans are hardy souls and take politics seriously, but the turnout is definitely going to be affected.

In 1976 then-candidate Jimmy Carter used the Iowa caucuses to give himself the national recognition that he did not have prior to winning there. In 1972 George McGovern won the caucuses, but they had not yet turned into any kind of national launching pad. After Iowa, Carter received attention and invitations to speak and be interviewed that gave him the momentum he needed to go on to win the nomination and be elected as the party standard-bearer and win the presidency. Since then, candidates have been attempting to duplicate that feat, with Barack Obama actually achieving it in 2008, the year I followed the caucuses for 24 months and wrote 2 books on the experience. The Iowa caucuses actually predicted the eventual national nominee and winner twice: Obama in 2008 and Bush in 2000. In 2004 the caucus winner in Des Moines (John Kerry) did go on to become the national nominee, but he did not win office. It is particularly interesting when you learn that Jimmy Carter only campaigned for 17 days in the state in 1976.

Ron DeSantis.

I did not become involved in following the caucuses in person until 2004, which was the year that John Kerry won the Iowa caucuses, John Edwards came in second, and Howard Dean came in third. The Kerry forces double-miked Howard Dean’s impassioned plea to his followers at the post party (I was there) and made him look totally foolish by replaying it what seemed like millions of times on television.

2008: January 3^rd at 7 p.m. Temperature that year was 30 degrees above zero, warmer than in 2004 when it was only 16 degrees. In 2012, my last year of following, the temperature was 40, but it was a very quiet night for Democrats, who had an incumbent president in the White House. This year’s thirty below zero prediction is going to be the coldest on record, and one wonders how many will show up to caucus for their candidate.

2012: January 3^rd. Supposedly, Romney won by 8 points, but then a recount showed that Rick Santorum might have won by 34 votes and Ron Paul came in third. This was the year that 8 missing precinct reports caused problems and the “win” was also taken from Santorum and awarded to Paul at one point. Not reliable, in other words.

2016: In the Democratic race, Hillary got 45% of the vote and Bernie Saunders came in second. Ted Cruz won the GOP contest, with votes going to Trump, Marco Rubio and Ben Carson, as well.

Vivek Ramaswamy on the GOP debate stage.

2020: Monday, February 3^rd. This was the year of the Shadow, Inc. app that was, apparently, never reliably field-tested. Then, the phone number that was supposed to be used as a fall-back method for voting was totally jammed up with calls. Days went by where national talking heads could not report who had won, and the person in charge resigned.

Results over time:

1972 – McGovern

1976 – Jimmy Carter

1980 – Jimmy Carter (Ted Kennedy got votes)

1984 – Walter Mondale

1988 – Dick Gephardt (who withdrew from the race shortly thereafter)

1992 – Tom Harkin (a native son)

1996 – Bill Clinton

2000 – Al Gore

2004 – John Kerry (38%) John Edwards (32%). Howard Dean (18%). Dick Gephardt (11%). Dennis Kucinich (1%). GOP – George W. Bush

2008 – Barack Obama – 38%, John Edwards – (30%), Hillary Clinton (29%) Elliot Richardson got 2% and Joe Biden got 1%.

2012 – Obama – 98% (a very quiet night in Des Moines) Mike Huckabee on the Republican side, prompting my headline: “Huckaboom or Huckabust?”

2016 – Hillary (50%). Bernie Saunders (49%) Ted Cruz on the GOP side.

2020 – Trump

Random Thoughts on the Iowa Caucuses of January 15, 2024

By Connie Wilson

On January 13, 2024

In Editorial, Essays on Politics: Best Political Essays & Ideology, Local, Of Local (Quad Cities') Interest, Politics, Pop Culture, Television

With Monday’s Iowa caucuses scheduled to go forward despite wind chills that could be as low as -30 below zero, the last polls I saw put Trump ahead but DeSantis and Nikki Haley separated by only one percentage point.

The real test on Monday, January 15^th, is going to be “Whose ground organization is strongest and can guarantee that the caucus-goers will actually trot out to caucus for their candidate?” Is Trump’s ground organization better (or at least equal to) DeSantis’? What about Haley’s?

I have actually attended the Iowa caucuses. It was winter and it was cold, but this time is going to be the coldest on record. The night I attended the caucuses in Des Moines in 2008 I was not an Iowa resident and, therefore, not there to actually line up behind a particular candidate. In fact, when they learned that I had been a teacher, they put me in charge of a random pack of children whose parents were actually voting. [That was fun for no one.]

When the Republicans caucus, they vote on paper ballots. The Democrats, however—who are not involved in this year’s caucus season in Iowa—did not use ballots. Instead, it was sheer un-orchestrated chaos with all kinds of voting and lobbying for viability and many other things that seem(ed) to belong in an elementary school election. Its refreshingly primitive. The cameramen from Sweden could not believe how basic the process was. Because the process is that basic, I would not be surprised if Iowa loses out on holding these things completely. There have always been complaints that Iowa is too white-bread and not diverse enough. Then there was the complete SNAFU season. Then there is this year’s weather. I’m thinking that the caucuses in Iowa of either party may well go the way of the dodo bird in 2028.

I watched the Town Hall meetings that focused on DeSantis and Haley and the things covered there were much like the final debate that involved just those two candidates. Until the offhand remark from Haley about New Hampshire voters “correcting” Iowa’s missteps, she was surging. She seems sane and has a far less authoritarian demeanor than the two men with whom she is competing.

DeSantis

There is little I like about Ron DeSantis. The “Sixty Minutes” special that detailed how he screwed over immigrants in ferrying them to Martha’s Vineyard showed a despicable lack of human compassion and empathy. It’s one thing to give the northern states a little taste of what the border states like Texas are dealing with; it’s totally another to have glossy brochures made up that promise desperate immigrants jobs when they land in Martha’s Vineyard. Maybe this would be the point to say WWJD (What would Jesus do?) Certainly not that. The fight with Disney over their position on homosexuality. The “don’t wear masks” attitude during Covid that DeSantis displayed (with masked high school students in the background). The preening over how he “took on” the teachers’ unions (and George Soros), as though that were something to be proud of. The inability to smile like a normal human being, which has been commented on by every late-night host. Why do I dislike him? Let me count the ways. Or not. He’s easy to dislike on sight. (That’s a large part of his problem.)

Haley

Nikki Haley.

Nikki Haley comes off as more reasonable on the issue of abortion. She is a female, after all, and a mother.

Her position on supporting Ukraine is a good one. As the former Ambassador to the United Nations she understands and articulates well the basic fact that, right now, Ukraine is doing the fighting and dying in opposing Putin, who might well set his sights on other European nations. DeSantis (and other GOP leaders) want to tie support for Ukraine to better border control. That phrase about being against it before I was for it (or something close) applies more to DeSantis’ positions than those of Haley.

I was bothered by the fact that neither candidate would answer the question posed by Jake Tapper about whether Donald J. Trump has the moral character to be President. It was just about as bad as the Ivy League Presidents testifying before Congress who couldn’t answer easy questions about anti-Semitic behavior on their college campuses. (Both lost their jobs).We lost Chris Christie in the mix, and he seems to be the only one who had the guts to call out his former friend of 22 years. It seems as though Christie—who helped prep Trump for the debates in 2020—is trying to make amends for his past misdeeds. I will miss Christie onstage calling out the obnoxious Vivek Ramaswamy as the most obnoxious blowhard in America. You don’t get truthful answers like that during political debates very often.

Border Control

Ron DeSantis.

The Big Issue that the Republicans will be trotting out in the months to come will be the border. The Democrats will be making just as much noise over the roll-back of Roe v. Wade. Nikki Haley offered a much more realistic and even-tempered attitude for the GOP to promulgate in a national election. Everyone agrees that the border is now (and has been for decades) a big problem that needs to be solved. But Congress needs to be involved in completely overhauling our immigration system. It looks, right now, as though the current Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro N. Mayorkas is being set up to take the fall for what most Americans view as a failure at the border. Biden’s attempt to portray America as that shining beacon on the hill that both Reagan and Romney alluded to may (or may not) be the reason for the influx of illegal immigrants, but you can be sure that the GOP will portray him as practically the sole cause of our recent border crisis. It is true that the border situation needs to be solved. It may be true that Biden’s words made the influx worse. (Trump’s separation of small children and infants from their parents and then losing them was not Great Policy, but that goes unremarked in Iowa.) However, totally blaming Biden for this unprecedented horde of immigrants ignores the many economic and political reasons that drive residents of Central and Latin America to risk death to come to this country. We need to be welcoming, but practical. Restructuring our immigrations policies and laws is necessary, just like we need to address gun control (which also hasn’t occurred) and we needed to overhaul health care (which hasn’t totally happened, but least the Affordable Care Act has survived, despite repeated GOP attempts to dismantle it) A physical wall, DJT’s solution, was never going to work without additional reforms of a more substantial sort. In regard to Mayorkas, it is fairly interesting that he has been notably absent from the Sunday morning talk shows and the Republicans now want to impeach him. Mayorkas seems to have missed out on the media training. He isn’t able to demonstrate progress on the border and he has the diplomatic skills of a basset hound. He neither looks nor acts the part he has been assigned to play.

Monday Predictions?

Until Nikki Haley’s misstep (verbally) in New Hampshire and the last debate, where she kept referring listeners to DeSantislies.com website (14 times by one talking head’s count), I thought she was going to top DeSantis on January 15^th. She is currently focusing her efforts on suburban areas in the state of Iowa, while DeSantis did “the full Grassley,” visiting all 99 Iowa counties, and is counting on rural support. DeSantis also out-spent Ms. Haley and, until the final debate, was doing much less well during televised Q&A opportunities.

However, DeSantis has picked up his game on the occasion of the final debate (as well as the Town Hall that preceded it). I agree with David Axelrod who has said that the True Test of who Triumphs at the caucuses will be which team can actually mobilize its committed delegates to turn out in frigid sub-zero weather. Pollsters say it will be Trump’s MAGA hordes coming in first.

The second place finish in the last poll I saw was 11% for Haley and 12% for DeSantis. It could go either way. I’d like to see a woman President, so I’m pulling for Nikki Haley. There are things about her policies (she is very pro gun) that I disagree with, but she seems more reasonable about hot-button issues, and certainly has stood up well under pressure. Plus, she has a nice smile, which puts her head and shoulders above DeSantis. Haley has far more international experience. It seems unlikely that the GOP would nominate a woman for the top of the ticket; I am not happy that she has dodged the question of whether she would run with Trump. She and DeSantis have not exactly been straightforward in their responses to questions that are touchy. True of all politicians, it seems. Makes me think of the poem I wrote at the tender age of 16, which I shall print below these ramblings.

I would like to know if Vivek Ramaswamy is the “secret” VP pick that Trump has alluded to; he seems like a very “out there.” He has gone off on various conspiracy theories ad nauseum. Maybe Trump has promised the second spot on the GOP ticket to a female Governor who will probably be about as good a pick as Sarah Palin was (which means a very bad one).

My Poem “Words” (written in 1960, the year I campaigned for JFK):

If fewer words were spoken,

If fewer words were said.

If deeds, alone, were the mark of a man,

Not the “catch” of an eloquent pledge.

If fewer words were spoken,

If fewer words were said

If, for all the fake forensics,

There were simple words, instead.

And a man stated just what he started to state,

Without false fuss or further ado,

If you weren’t a politician