Monthly Archives: July 2012

More on Mitt Romney’s tax returns, more ties with the Bushes

Posted on by
1

More reasons for Mitt Romney to release tax returns, or maybe another reason why he hasn’t released his tax returns

Ties with Team Bush, part 1

 

Bush endorsing Romney

To be clear, the foremost reason why a candidate for the White House should release financial records is principle. The public has a right to know of any encumbrances and influences borne by someone running for the presidency, and for a presidential candidate, especially a major candidate, to dismiss or to downplay this principle is unworthy.

Descending swiftly to less exalted planes of argument, it should be apparent by now that there are also political reasons for presumptive-GOP nominee Mitt Romney to release his income tax returns. He seems to be concealing something, and even aside from the principle enunciated above it’s making him look bad. Admittedly the widespread buzz about Romney’s secretiveness may be playing into the hands of the Romney campaign. Possibly the campaign has made a tactical decision to refuse to release the IRS returns right up to the point when it about-faces and releases them, showing once and for all that there’s nothing there.

 

Romney, spoofed

In the meantime, however, that possibility has done nothing to deter speculation about Romney’s paper trail or financial track record. Time and space preclude an exhaustive list of speculations voiced so far about what Romney might be hiding, but here are a few:

  • Did Romney pay no income tax at all some years, despite his wealth? Raised in January, this possibility has also been discussed in Bloomberg News and in the Washington Post, among other outlets.
  • Are Romney’s effective tax rates just embarrassingly low, compared to the taxes much poorer people pay in the United States? Think Progress discussed this one early, followed by other outlets including money.cnn.com and The Daily Beast.
  • Would his IRS returns reveal more about Romney’s embarrassing offshore accounts and assets? The newest issue of Vanity Fair has more on this.
  • Then there is the overlapping issue of tax havens and tax shelters, wherever they may be. Has Romney been even more closely associated with them than the public has yet been made aware?
  • Are there more discrepancies in Romney’s own bookkeeping, as between his IRS filings and his company’s SEC filings, or between his records and his public statements?

 

Here is another question.

A plethora of SEC filings and other sources indicate that Romney and his cronies in the business community, including Marriott, helped GWBush and the Bush team over the years. As has been noted elsewhere, in this eloquent piece by Joe Conason for example, the Bush administration and Team Bush are not looking good in electoral politics in 2012. It is politically understandable that Romney wouldn’t want to be linked with the Bush image. But  even a quick overview of George W. Bush’s track record in business corroborates  Ralph Nader’s comment in 2000 that George Bush was “a group of corporations running as a man,” and prominent among those corporations was Marriott–closely tied to Romney, Romney’s family, and Romney’s companies. Marriott ties not only gave Mitt Romney his first name (after the Willard in Marriott) but also gave Dubya his business career.

 

An early Carlyle Group acquisition

The Marriott clan’s ties to the Romney team, past and present, are too extensive and too well reported to need belaboring here. Romney-Marriott closeness is a political and financial given. That Marriott enterprises also provided George W. Bush the platform for his business career has not been widely reported–none of the major media outlets touched it, or thoroughly vetted Bush’s business career, in 2000–although I sketched part of the story in 2004. One minor entity was an unsuccessful airline food company named Caterair International Corporation, a spin-off from Marriott Corporation, which founded the airline-food industry in the thirties. As written previously, CaterAir  was started in 1989 by a private investors group including Bush supporters Daniel J. Altobello and Frederic V. Malek, who then brought Bush on. George W. Bush became a director at CaterAir officially in 1990, the company got an additional boost from the Carlyle Group, where George H. W. Bush came on board after leaving the White House in 1992, and Bush left in 1994 to run for Governor of Texas.

 

Former Texas Gov. Ann Richards

Romney-Bush family ties in Virginia

 

Coleman Andrews, second from left

The Marriott company or cluster of interests, however, is not the only Romney-Bush link. If we really want to know more about ties between Romney interests and Bush interests over the years, we can cut out the Marriott middleman and go straight to, among others, T. Coleman Andrews III, co-founding partner of Bain Capital and brother of Scott Andrews, who co-founded the investment firm Winston Partners with George W. Bush’s youngest brother, Marvin Bush. The family ties in politics and finance run deep. The Andrews’ late grandfather, Thomas Coleman Andrews, a founder of the John Birch Society, resigned from his position as IRS commissioner under Eisenhower. Scott Andrews served as an executive in two air transport companies, Presidential Airways and World Corp–where Coleman Andrews was chair. Both went bankrupt; Coleman Andrews left WorldCorp in 1998. A brother-in-law of Jack Kemp, he also became CEO of South African Airways.

Side note: Called in by Nelson Mandela as a consultant for South African Airways, Coleman Andrews reportedly spent hundreds of millions on consultants including Bain Capital. Andrews himself left SAA in 2001 with a golden parachute reported at $14 million. There is no indication at this time that the Romney campaign plans to include a stop in South Africa for one of its international fundraisers.

Space precludes an extensive history of WorldCorp here. Suffice it to say that Bain Capital and Bain alumni, or directors and officers, were all over the company and its bankruptcy, as shown here and here and here among numerous documents. WorldCorp and Bain were all over the problems at South African Airways, as noted. They were thick on the ground in the bankruptcy of World Airways–owned by WorldCorp and headed by Coleman Andrews–which also purchased consulting from Bain Capital. They were also extensively connected with a series of mergers and buy-outs through which a lesser known company called US Order became part of ever larger financial services firms. For example, see this SEC filing dating from the 2005 merger of InteliData and Corillian Corporation. InteliData, with Bain alum John Backus on board, became Coriallian; Corillian bought CheckFree, now FISERV.

“ Patrick F. Graham, age 65, has served as a director of InteliData since 1996 and was a director of US Order, Inc. from 1993 until US Order and Colonial Data Technologies Corp. merged to form InteliData in November 1996. Since October 2001, he has been the Vice President of Business Development and Strategic Projects for The Gillette Company, a consumer products marketer of personal care and personal use products. From July 1999 until October 2001, he was the Director of the Global Strategy Practice of A.T. Kearney, Inc., a management consulting firm. From 1997 until June 1999, he served as Chief Executive Officer of WorldCorp, Inc. On February 12, 1999, WorldCorp, Inc. filed a voluntary petition and a proposed plan of reorganization under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code with the United States Bankruptcy Court for the district of Delaware. He was previously a director of Bain & Company, Inc., a management consulting firm Mr. Graham co-founded in 1973. In addition to his primary responsibilities with Bain clients, he served as Bain’s Vice Chairman and Chief Financial Officer. Prior to founding Bain, Mr. Graham was a group Vice President with the Boston Consulting Group. Mr. Graham is also a director of Stericycle, Inc., a provider of medical waste services and OSHA compliance services.”

A co-founder of Bain, Graham served on the board of InteliData with an alumna of CaterAir and as stated another alumnus of Bain Capital as well as of US Order. The ties extend farther. This SEC filing from World Air Holdings, the holding company of World Airways and WorldCorp, lists as directors John Backus, A. Scott Andrews and Daniel J. Altobello. Again, sponsors of Bush family interests and of George W. Bush, respectively, in the realms of finance and of politics have been working hand in corporate glove for years with Romney cronies and partners. This is no far-fetched, diffuse, stretched set of associations; it’s partners and relatives with longstanding political and financial ties, serving in the same boardrooms–boardrooms, be it noted, that were key in some spectacular bankruptcies and other failures at a considerable human cost. Furthermore, the ties extend to some political views that are considered weird by any reasonable criterion.

It’s that simple.

Romney’s reluctance to release his detailed IRS records is not mystifying. It will be a little mystifying if he gets away with not doing so.

Today’s history lesson: CaterAir, George W. Bush (and Marriott)

Posted on by
5

Today’s history lesson: CaterAir, George W. Bush (and Marriott)

In July 2003, the founder of the Carlyle Group, David Rubenstein, chatted with company investors and made several tape-recorded comments about a former director at one Carlyle subsidiary. The subsidiary was an ill-fated airline-food company named CaterAir International Corporation, a spin-off from Marriott, and the director was George W. Bush:

“But when we were putting the board together, somebody came to me and said, look there is a guy who would like to be on the board.  He’s kind of down on his luck a bit.  Needs a job.  Needs a board position.  Needs some board positions. Could you put him on the board?  Pay him a salary and he’ll be a good board member and be a loyal vote for the management and so forth.”

“I said well we’re not usually in that business.  But okay, let me meet the guy. I met the guy.  I said I don’t think he adds that much value.  We’ll put him on the board because–you know–we’ll do a favor for this guy; he’s done a favor for us. We put him on the board and spent three years.  Came to all the meetings.  Told a lot of jokes.  Not that many clean ones.  And after a while I kind of said to him, after about three years–you know, I’m not sure this is really for you.  Maybe you should do something else.  Because I don’t think you’re adding that much value to the board.  You don’t know that much about the company.”

“And I said, thanks–didn’t think I’d ever see him again.  His name is George W. Bush.  He became President of the United States.  So you know if you said to me, name 25 million people who would maybe be President of the United States, he wouldn’t have been in that category.  So you never know.  Anyway, I haven’t been invited to the White House for many things.”

Audio of Rubenstein’s becoming candor can be found at Pacifica among other sites.

CaterAir was founded in 1989, spun off partly from Marriott Corporation by a private investors group including prominent Bush supporters Daniel J. Altobello and Frederic V. Malek.  Auspices were poor. Airline-food jokes aside, Marriott, which had founded the airline catering industry, reportedly let its airline catering division go because of thin profits and uncertainties in the airline industry. However, it also provided a place for the future candidate for Texas governor and the White House.

George W. Bush

The Carlyle Group, where George H. W. Bush joined the board after leaving the White House, gave George W. Bush the directorship at CaterAir in 1990.  Bush left in 1994 to run for Governor of Texas.  Here is a partial chronology of CaterAir’s bumpy career:

  • February 1990:  CaterAir restructures its longterm debt, withdrawing an earlier SEC filing for $110 million and going for $40 million more.  Eastern Airlines, which went bankrupt, was one earlier CaterAir client.
  • May 1990:  Merrill Lynch, a large brokerage firm with its own ties to the Bush clan, shops $250 million in refinancing for CaterAir, characterized in the business press as a high-risk, high-yield junk bond.
  • August 1990:  CaterAir completes its refinancing with a bridge loan.  Following the collapse of the junk bond market, two senior Merrill Lynch executives who led the company’s foray into junk bonds resign.  Bridge loans like the one to CaterAir are expected to become fewer.
  • December 1990:  CaterAir awards a contract to a California company to develop “a robotics system for its in-flight catering operations” including wrapping food.
  • March 1991:  Carlyle Group persuades Saudi Arabia’s Prince al-Walid bin Talal to spend a half-billion purchasing part of America’s largest banking company, Citicorp, earning a commission.  David Rubenstein says of Carlyle’s CaterAir purchase, “Despite the fact that the airline business is in trouble, the company is worth an enormous amount more than what we paid for it.”  Malek is quoted by NYTimes as saying, “I thought George W. Bush could make a contribution to CaterAir.”
  • December 1991:  CaterAir freezes or rolls back wages on most of its 20,000 employees, in spite of winning 66 new contracts in 1991.  Contracts with 48 air carriers in 28 cities include Virgin Atlantic at Boston’s Logan, All Nippon at JFK in New York, and Aerolineas Argentinas at Miami’s airport.
  • June 1992:  CaterAir among other companies campaigns against a bill in the California state senate to tax airline food, saying the tax will hurt their ability to employ workers.
  • August 1992:  CaterAir says it is not restructuring its debt in spite of flat sales.  Its joint ventures include Russia’s Aeroflot, the former national airline of the Soviet Union, operating a kitchen that caters to all flights through Moscow.
  • August 1992:  a former Marriott official pleads guilty to embezzling $1.4 million over 14 years, using fraudulent invoices from several vendors including CaterAir.
  • October 1992:  Carlyle buys part of General Dynamics Corporation, part of a two-year process becoming one of the nation’s largest military contractors.  Carlyle also completes purchase of a Washington, DC, radio station and two stations in Virginia; is said looking to buy more stations after FCC expansion of allowable number of stations in a market to 18 for one owner, up from 12.
  • December 1992:  an article in the Journal of the American Medical Association describes an outbreak of illness suffered by passengers including several Minnesota Vikings back in 1989.  Federal and state epidemiologists trace the problem to Marriott food handlers who did not wash their hands.  Shigellosis, from bacteria found in human feces, confirmed or probable in about 240 cases of passenger illness.  This division became CaterAir.
  • December 1992:  CaterAir’s St. Croix facility is closed down by the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) for five days, until it cleans up its kitchen and complies with FDA sanitation regulations.  The St. Croix is given a poor 57% rating and classified “Not Approved.”  Problems identified include “rodent pellets on a tray of salad plates” and elsewhere; “live flies throughout the kitchen”; “cockroaches on the kitchen floor and tray assembling room”; “old food and grease encrusted on the stove and food storage shelves”; etc.
  • January 1993:  George H. W. Bush leaves office.
  • April 1993:  CaterAir is now the nation’s largest airline caterer.
  • May 1993:  George W. Bush resigns from CaterAir.  The FDA’s magazine, FDA Consumer, publishes an article about its five-day closing down of the St. Croix catering operation back in December, titled “Caterer Cleans Up, Flies Right.”
  • July 1993:  company sells an Orlando, FL, property for $3.4 million.
  • August 1993:  CaterAir files with the SEC to sell another $230 million in notes.
  • November 1993:  company announces it will relocate its corporate headquarters to Bethesda, MD, from Potomac, MD.  Bush resigns from board of Harken Energy.
  • April 1994: a federal court rules against CaterAir in company’s appeal of an NLRB decision.
  • June 1994:  at a Chief Executive Roundtable, CaterAir International’s Altobello discusses his company’s “passport for success” program, said to recognize employees who provide exceptional service.
  • September 1994:  Governor Ann Richards’ reelection campaign runs an ad criticizing GWBush’s business experience, saying that companies where Bush served lost a combined $371.6 million.  The campaign publishes a handout titled The Bottom Line:  The Business Career of George W. Bush.  While the companies lost $371 million, the campaign says, Bush made $1.3 million.  CaterAir lost $285.1 million during Bush’s stint on board; Bush received $75,000.  The Bush campaign responds within hours, complaining about Richards’ “personal attacks.”
  • September 1994:  Daniel Altobello says Bush cannot be held responsible for losses at the company.
  • October 1994:  business experts, unnamed, defend Bush on grounds that his company role was limited to attending quarterly meetings.
  • August 1995:  Carlyle’s purchase of CaterAir is described as a “disaster.”
  • February 2001:  George W. Bush, now President, signals willingness to get involved in airline mechanics union negotiations with Northwest Airlines.  A former president of Northwest is Frederic Malek, who put Bush on CaterAir’s board; Malek is still a major Northwest shareholder.
  • Et cetera.

Be it noted that senior and longtime GOPer Malek’s ties with Republican presidential campaigns continue to the present.

Malek on television

Be it also noted that the counter-arguments, if you call them that, rolled out to obscure George W. Bush’s business record in the 1994 election–in Texas–strongly resemble those being used in the 2012 election by Mitt Romney. He’s No Longer With the Company, He Had Nothing to Do With Those Decisions, He Didn’t Do All That Much To Begin With etc.

Moving forward–

Is this another reason why Romney hasn’t released his tax returns? –That they would disclose yet more of Romney’s ties to the Bush team and to GWBush’s business and political career, now in some ill favor?

Romney with Bush

Then there is the larger problem, larger, that is, than one man’s political career. We report, you decide:  who is mainly responsible for the airlines’ troubles?  Minimum-wage-paid ill-trained lower-level employees?  Or overpaid and under-performing ‘managers’ who spent decades lobbying for every conceivable tax break, government giveaway, and executive privilege, while resisting every improvement in security, safety, and even cleanliness–and simultaneously using the existence of government agencies as a way to claim that their food, for example, is safe?

As in the article linked, one of the company’s first claims about food-borne illness is that the FDA helps it prevent same.

The Colorado shootings: There were danger signs

Posted on by
1

Colorado shooter’s stockpiling an arsenal was a danger sign

As word got out about the high-tech arsenal and combat gear amassed by Aurora, Colo., shooter James Holmes, some elements on the right immediately seized on the factual news as basis for supposititious theories. Predictably the theories are being circulated by email.

 

‘NaturalNews’ guy

The main narrative runs as follows:

Holmes’ equipment is too good for ordinary people to acquire, and therefore he must have had help/been coached by someone behind the scenes.

“In other words, this guy was equipped with exotic gear by someone with connections to military equipment.
SWAT clothing, explosives, complex booby-traps… c’mon, this isn’t a “lone gunman.” This is somebody who was selected for a mission, given equipment to carry it out, then somehow brainwashed into getting it done.”

The shooter’s actions seem out of character for Holmes.

“The New York Times is now reporting:
Billy Kromka, a pre-med student at the University of Colorado, Boulder, worked with Mr. Holmes for three months last summer as a research assistant in a lab of at the Anschutz Medical Campus. Mr. Kromka said he was surprised to learn Mr. Holmes was the shooting suspect. “It was just shocking, because there was no way I thought he could have the capacity to do commit an atrocity like this,” he said. (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/21/us/colorado-mall-shooting.html?page…)

“He spent much of his time immersed in the computer, often participating in role-playing online games…”

There is already conjecture that James Holmes may have been involved in mind-altering neuroscience research and ended up becoming involved at a depth he never anticipated. His actions clearly show a strange detachment from reality, indicating he was not in his right mind. That can only typically be accomplished through drugs, hypnosis or trauma (and sometimes all three).”

His behavior is inconsistent–“his behavior doesn’t add up”:

“His behavior already reveals stark inconsistencies that question the mainstream explanation of events. For example, he opened fire on innocent people but then calmly surrendered to police without resistance. This is not consistent with the idea of “killing everyone.”

Furthermore, he then admitted to police that his apartment was booby-trapped with explosives. If you were really an evil-minded Joker trying to kill people (including cops), why would you warn them about the booby trap in advance? It doesn’t add up.”

What does it all add up to? –An operation, a “deliberate plot” by government, its purpose to make guns look bad or, as they put it, go after the Second Amendment:

“More and more, this shooting is looking like a *deliberate plot* staged by the government itself much like /Operation Fast and Furious/ pulled off by the ATF
(http://www.naturalnews.com/032934_ATF_illegal_firearms.html) which helped smuggle tens of thousands of guns into Mexico for the purpose of causing “gun violence” in the USA, then blaming the Second Amendment for it.”

The kicker? — Another purpose for this black op was to distract attention away from Rep. Michele Bachmann’s nut-stuff, McCarthyite accusations about a ‘Muslim Brotherhood’ in government. This one also has been transmitted by email:

” Please change: “has been successfully distracted”

To:  “has in effect been distracted from the Michele Bachmann, et al./Muslim Brotherhood issue, ” (plus additional edit):”

 

The foregoing is not the only misapplied rightwing conjecture about the Colorado shooter. Another web site, with singular nastiness, posits that he may be Jewish (spelled coyly). An early attempt via Facebook that ferreted out the wrong guy was widely reported–as was ABC News’ linking him briefly to the Tea Party.

These last two errors, however, are to some extent atypical. One thing the goofiest arguments tend to have in common is insisting falsely that the shooter was part of a group (wittingly or un-). As I wrote in my previous post on this sad topic, that is the key distortion. Incident after mass shooting incident involves a disturbed, loner-type guy–Littleton, Colo., Virginia Tech, Aurora, Colo.; the shootings at schools in Scotland and in China; the massacre of young people at a youth camp in Norway. Yet always the rightwing noise machine, the gun stockpilers, the NRA and the weapons-and-gear industry who market to them, and the political figures who pander to them continue to focus on and characterize, not him, but Them.

This is a classic example of what Freud called projection and denial.

Sometimes ordinary language hardly seems enough. We need a people’s mic here.

This shooting wasn’t an army against one individual.

THIS SHOOTING WASN’T AN ARMY AGAINST ONE INDIVIDUAL!

 

It was the other way around.

IT WAS THE OTHER WAY AROUND!

 

It wasn’t a whole troop against one innocent guy.

IT WASN’T A WHOLE TROOP AGAINST ONE INNOCENT GUY!

 

You.

YOU!

It was one guy, armed to the teeth, shooting randomly at a crowd of innocent people,

IT WAS ONE GUY, ARMED TO THE TEETH, SHOOTING RANDOMLY AT A CROWD OF INNOCENT PEOPLE!

Still might not work, of course–nothing seems to penetrate with these people. Also, they tend to have an entrepreneurial angle that could influence independent judgment, assuming independent judgment is still a desideratum. The ‘naturalnews’ web site quoted above, if you notice, is a big pusher of survivalist equipment–stock up now–including dietary/nutritional supplements. This is the dietary/etc equivalent of Glenn Beck’s pushing gold, urging listeners (if any) to hoard it up before the coming economic conflagration, yet unnamed. These are the spokespersons, if you notice, who tend not to be fans of government agencies like the FDA, the Federal Reserve and the FDIC. Again there might be a touch of the entrepreneurial in their outlook.

This entrepreneurial dimension is one thing the wing-nut sites have in common with corporate media outlets. They also have one story element in common with the largest media outlets, the insistence on Holmes as a ‘mystery man’ with ‘no background’. As posted previously, this one became an instant myth, conveyed here and here for example.

The right-wingers hype the supposed mystery angle to different effect than the larger outlets, of course. For the former, Holmes’ supposed lack of footprint makes him a shadow figure, a private-life version of the Manchurian candidate some of them–including some wealthy GOP donors–perceive President Obama to be. In this view, he is a deteriorated version of the Cary Grant character in Hitchcock’s brilliant North by Northwest, someone who can be grabbed and used by government agencies, sucked into some larger plot.

 

Cary Grant, heading for cornfield

‘Mainstream’ outlets touted Holmes’ supposed lack of footprint to more subtle and insidious effect.  The message embedded in that no-social-media-footprint meme? Simple:

  • We Can’t Tell what kind of person will just go off the rails next
  • So We Can’t Tell who will go out and shoot up a bunch of people
  • So There Is Nothing We Can Do About It
  • Therefore, There’s No Use trying for gun control.

This is not exaggeration, or not by much. This is nearly verbatim the line of thought voiced by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) on a Sunday morning talk show after the Colorado shootings. It is also a line suspiciously easy for media outlets, under fear of pressure from NRA-influenced advertisers, to fall into.

Holmes will almost undoubtedly turn out to have had more cyber presence than has yet been fully reported. Before recently, he often went by the nickname Jimmy, and social media sites turn up countless Jimmy Holmeses; he did much of his combat-gear purchasing online, something that generally leaves a trail; and he played complex and obscure games online, like many of his peers. As written previously, one of Holmes’ new usernames turns up on Twitter–with the line, “When life gives you lemons, shoot people.”

 

News reports have already indicated some of the purchase trail. From the transcript:

“BOB ORR (CBS News Justice Correspondent): Bob, first of all, the Chief was modest. I don’t think he really gave us all the details of what the great work that’s been done on the ground has produced. The police there along with the federal partners have amassed a substantial case of evidence already. That this was a premeditated act of murder and the planning goes back about four months. They’ve recovered things like shipping labels from a dumpster in front of Holmes’s apartment. They’ve got credit card records. They know he shopped at internet sites like BulkAmmo.com, TacticalGear.com. They have a surveillance tape of Holmes allegedly picking up a hundred and sixty pounds of ammunition at a FedEx counter in Colorado. And they also have talked to a UPS driver that says, “Oh, I remember this guy. He had ninety packages delivered to him in his work address.”

More importantly, the unconscious obfuscation in this representation of Holmes as no-footprint is a sign of the deeper problem we have in discerning signs of mental illness or extreme distress even in people we know.

Mentally ill people are still people, and up to a point their behavior is that of other people. This is especially complicated in young people, who even in the best lives are often trying out new versions of themselves, deciding which version of themselves they want to be. The transition from Jimmy to ClassicJimbo could have been one of those harmless personality reinventions that young people engage in–like changing hair color or hairstyle, getting body piercings or tattoos, going on dating sites, choosing to go by first name rather than by middle name or vice versa, or by full name rather than nickname. (Some of the Obama-haters have made a big deal about that, re Obama; they tend not to mention that the young Mitt Romney–who started out Billy Romney–did the same.) Relocating to a different town, starting at a new school, changing relationships–all of these are stressful events; they also often accompany other experimentation, again often harmless.

But given what Holmes was engaged in, we don’t actually have to dig too deep to see the danger signs. The no-danger-signs meme is as false as the no-footprint meme. Holmes’ stockpiling deadly weapons and combat gear was itself a danger sign and should have raised a flag. ‘Jimmy Holmes’ may or may not turn up in social media. Maybe–can’t tell. His secretiveness or privativeness in playing online games may or may not turn out to exceed that of other adolescents; we can’t tell yet. But as with Cho at Virginia Tech and the pair of shooters at Columbine, one fact indubitably clear is that he was stockpiling implements of war, weapons and gear for the use of deadly force. A partial inventory of his deadly arsenal is provided by Aurora Police Chief Dan Oates; video here. Holmes also got online enough to display a mind running more and more on violence–shooting people. To the list of weapons and other gear and the explosive or incendiary devices in his apartment another item may be added. It sounds as if Holmes also purchased some kind of voice-distortion device for his answering machine, on which he left a recording that spooked a local gun-range owner.

It has now been reported that Holmes also sent a letter, before the shootings, to a professor at the University of Colorado. The letter did not receive its intended recipient, because campus mail did its usual thing.*

Extreme acts often generate extreme responses. Fortunately the shootings at a movie theater in Colorado have not brought a concomitant reaction of deadly force. But they did, initially at least, generate an extreme throwing up of hands in a collective media act of learned helplessness.

Hint, for those in the news media who–in between asking helplessly, What can we do?–are wondering What were the signs? Here are the signs: A young guy, educated, a good student, with his life ahead of him, started stocking up on assault guns, a high-powered rifle, body armor including throat protector and groin protector, tear gas/irritant containers, components for home-made explosives.

 

Et cetera.

ET CETERA!

 

* I am well aware that I have offended pro-gun lobbyists before. Some day, in a lighter moment, I hope to start on campus mail.

[Update]

Dr. Lynne Fenton, the assistant professor to whom James Holmes wrote and sent a package, was also director of student mental health services at the University of Colorado medical school. Holmes was also one of her psychiatric patients.

Those pesky regulations and the empty threat of filibuster

Posted on by
1

Regulation, public policy and the hollow threat of filibuster

Family responsibilities and work have taken me in recent months to Louisville, Ky., Shreveport, La., and Houston, Texas. The changes of place did not change the big picture. In every place, local news stories and larger news stories–this is something one can count on–reconfirmed the need for what the GOP calls ‘job-killing regulations’. This phrase is quite the talking point, by the way, notwithstanding its lack of validity. The nonprofit web site Think Progress reported in April that use of “job-killing regulation” increased 17750 percent in U.S. newspapers between 2007 and 2011.

Orwell lives, and this is one of the big Orwellianisms. Repeat it often enough, and it starts to seem plausible? –Let’s hope not. There is no evidence that regulation kills jobs.

On the contrary, there is every indication that unregulated outsourcing, off-shoring, merger and consolidation do kill jobs, or at least U.S. jobs. This is one of the big reasons why the rightwing noise machine is so against what it characterizes as regulation: protection of jobs, like protection of public health and public safety, works to the advantage of the many, rather than just of the few.

There is also every indication that lack of regulation–genuine regulation, backed up by oversight and enforcement–kills people. Does any responsible person really want an Alzheimer’s facility, or any long-term care facility, to be unregulated and unmonitored? Unlikely, and the same goes for day care centers, private schools, and children’s camps. For that matter, the same goes for the athletic program at Penn State (State Penn).

Travel is a continuing reminder of the need to protect public safety and public health. From the interior space on an airplane–if any–to getting from airport to final destination, from questions like whether your luggage arrives to more essential questions like whether you do, our predominant business model tends to create a continuing tug-of-war between efforts to cut corners at the top (corporate management) and efforts to survive at the bottom (customers). The same goes for every other industry. There are some honorable exceptions, such as CREDO, and they deserve kudos. But exceptions do not disprove the general rule.

Among the local news stories in Kentucky:

  • Neighbors in one community gathered at an elementary school to hear about ground contamination from lead, arsenic and DDT from a 29-acre industrial site near their property.
  • Three day care centers in Louisville recently closed, after the driver of a van crashed, killing a woman passenger and sending 14 children to the hospital, three in intensive care. The company operating the centers had previously been cited by state agencies for dozens of safety violations; this is a perfect example of the kind of ‘small business’ where ‘job-killing regulations’ are bemoaned by Mitt Romney and his spokespersons including Ed Gillespie.
  • In other local news, an abandoned theme park has been getting only minimal maintenance, meaning that its structures will at some point just fall down. The company that owns it, Six Flags, was in bankruptcy reorganization, and the Kentucky State Fair Board faces its own budget constraints–like virtually all state and local agencies.

When we lose ‘government jobs’–another favorite Orwellianism–we lose independent oversight for dangerous occupations and sites.

Speaking of oversight and dangerous sites, word of fraud in the investment world also continually seeps out. A few familiar examples suffice:

  • Bernard Madoff’s brother Peter has pleaded guilty to fabricating compliance reports and deceiving the SEC. This case–the record-breaking Madoff Ponzi scheme–is another reminder of the need for good, honest record-keeping, and for someone to watch the custodians.
  • Houston can do you an Allen Stanford, investment scheme $8 billion.
  • An investment advisor in Glasgow, Ky., is indicted for allegedly defrauding investors in Kentucky and Indiana of $2.4 million. Having promised to invest customers’ money, the so-called advisor allegedly spent it on a shooting range he set up in an old rock quarry, and on himself.
  • Closer to home (D.C. region), the former CEO of Virginia’s Bank of the Commonwealth has been indicted for alleged fraud conspiracy in covering up the bank’s financial condition since 2008.
  • On a grander scale, we have august Barclays bank allegedly depressing its interest rate on lending–and thereby short-changing institutional investors including Baltimore City on returns they could have gotten. The city of Baltimore is suing. Time will tell whether Virginia Attorney General Ken (“Kooky”) Cuccinelli elects to do the same.

All of these problems are a function of privatizing gain, socializing risk; reserving gains for the few and shifting the burdens of compliance, taxation and monitoring to the general public, to the individual, and to state and local government. The pattern fits into a larger one: Over-all family wealth in the U.S. declined 39 percent from 2007 to 2010, while the wealthiest gained 2 percent.

No one talks about it this way, but the NRA and nut-right mantra that what everybody needs are bigger guns and more guns also fits into the same pattern. Why, when you think about it, should a private citizen be expected to go out and purchase ludicrously expensive semi-automatic weapons for protection? Why should the onus of acquiring combat gear and combat training be on private citizens in the first place? Socializing risk, privatizing gain–the big-time weapons commerce fills the bill, and our docile GOP lawmakers relentlessly forward this agenda by talking about it as a “right.” Funnily enough, they do not talk about purchasing health insurance the same way.

For self-defence, there is actually no evidence that bigger magazines and more clips mean more protection. Even at worst–firing a gun at someone–you need one good shot, not a spray of careless rounds. That’s if you really care about self-defense rather than aggression.

But our NRA, and the politicians hired by the NRA, have been intent for decades now on blurring the line between self-defense and aggression.

Again when you think about it, the sole use for automatic and semi-automatic multiple-shot firearms, as for big magazines that hold hundreds of rounds of ammo, would be to kill off a whole crowd or army of attackers. It happens in movies. In real life, armed attacks are generally perpetrated by–what’s that word again?–oh, yes!–loners. In reality, unlike in film, attacks with big-time weapons are more liable to come from one gunman or two, shooting into a crowd or a classroom, than from a crowd shooting at the one lone individual (you, in this paranoid view).

This fact could represent something of a hurdle for the guns-and-ammo industry, the NRA, and the GOP officeholders who support them, if they were to permit its transmission. So they prevent its getting out, as much as possible–no small feat, given that it surfaces again every time some disturbed young guy, heavily armed, commits a mass shooting. So what’s a guns-and-ammo industry to do? –Why, market to the paranoid and unstable, of course. What are the cartel-supporting NRA and the NRA-supporting GOP to do? –Why, vent as much hyperbolic us-and-them rhetoric into the air as possible (Michelle Bachmann’s nonsense about Huma Abedin is only the most recent example).

Anything to obfuscate the fact that mass shootings are committed by the lone off-base guy, against the masses, not the other way around.

James Holmes

This point should not be oversimplified, but it also should not be lost sight of. Back to ‘regulation’ again–that being the GOP word for providing for public safety and public health: Public safety and public health require decent regulation of indecent commerce. Multiple clips and magazines, body armor, automatic or so-called semi-automatic rifles, assault weapons, military-grade- and SWAT-team gear–there is no reason why unauthorized civilians should be allowed to buy them. We need regulation of the online commerce that gets around state and local attempts to protect public safety. We need for private gun sales, second-hand gun sales, straw purchases, auctions, and gun shows to operate under the same law as storefront owners who sell guns do.

The laws, furthermore,  need to be good.

Contrary to the thrust of some media representations, the situation is not hopeless. There is no such thing as perfect safety or perfected public safety, as there is no other perfection on earth. But the fact that we cannot do everything is not an argument for doing nothing. In public policy, some specific remedies are clear.

And in the politics that lead to policy changes, some highly specific small steps are also clear, and timely. There is no reason, for example, why strong public support for reasonable public safety measures should be contravened by a minority in the senate–by the mere threat of filibuster.

Calls to abolish the filibuster by amending the constitution are about as good an idea as most proposed constitutional amendments, which means not very. There is a simpler, cleaner and more legitimate means to address this ridiculous problem that never should have been allowed to arise in the first place: When our GOP minority in the U.S. Senate threatens to filibuster, make them actually filibuster. Let Mitch McConnell and Jim Inhofe and Dan Coats and the rest get up there and do like Jimmy Stewart in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, albeit with less idealism. Let them read aloud from the Bible they profess to love so much, read Shakespeare, read Little Women or Anne of Green Gables for that matter.

Mitch McConnell

Having the mere threat of filibuster substitute for putting in the time on the floor, preventing needed legislation, is unconstitutional.

 

 

“When life gives you lemons, shoot people”–James Holmes shows up on Twitter after all

Posted on by
1

“When life gives you lemons, shoot people.” James Holmes on Twitter?

Before going more to the plethora of evidence that James Eagan Holmes acquired his arsenal on the Internet, here are some indications of his social media use. The New York Post reported Saturday–following TMZ, Radar Online and Mediaite–that Holmes appears to have shown up recently on a sex web site, AdultFriendFinder.

His username is the innocuous ‘classicjimbo’, fairly popular as a user name on the Net–like ‘The Joker’. Accompanying photos, however, do look like Holmes, and user gives his place as Aurora, Colo.

Holmes and friend on web site

Looks like a match, as does this.

Holmes' page on web site

Here is another match: The same username and photo pop up on Twitter. User’s quotation of choice: “When life gives you lemons, shoot people.” “Prison.”

Same photo:

'ClassicJimbo' on Twitter

Oddly, early reports stated that Holmes showed no use of social media, including Twitter. Other commentators rushed to assert that Holmes had no Internet presence to speak of.

Jumping the gun to attack the wrong James Holmes online is one obstacle to achieving accuracy, and is certainly a problem for the persons wrongly accused.

Asserting early on, in news reports, that a young male neurosciences grad student did not use social media is another problem for accuracy. Listening to the news coverage, I was astounded at that statement. It would be remarkable for any budding scientist not to have cyber presence.

N.b.: The people named James Holmes on Facebook and on Twitter, etc., are different persons than the Colorado shooter. Attacking the wrong person–or any person–is no path to a solution.

If the ClassicJimbo on Twitter is Holmes, he was not following anyone. AdultFriendFinder is also on Twitter, as was Jessica Ghawi. It would be illuminating to trace Holmes’ computer use during his last days/hours, if only as part of a process of elimination. Aurora Police Chief Dan Oates has said that authorities are examining the computer found in Holmes’ apartment.

[Update 6:30 p.m.]

This media-outlet insistence that James E. Holmes had no social media presence, or no online presence, is looking odder all the time. He had, and he did.

There’s another oddity, too: Reportedly Holmes called himself ‘The Joker’ to police. But he does not resemble The Joker. The red-orange hair resembles Jim Carrey’s Riddler. Obviously this is a detail, but colorful details loom large in the envisionings of schizophrenics and deeply depressed individuals. Regardless of whether Holmes was in some confused way trying to throw authorities off the scent, or just got the names wrong, or was misreported, The Riddler is the look that determines the hair color. There’s no Heath Ledger in that carrot top.

Carrey as The Riddler

For what it’s worth, searching the social media site MySpace for ‘The Riddler’ turns up 400 hits. Narrowing the search to young males in Colorado turns up two, one a 24-year-old in Aurora, Colo:

http://www.myspace.com/thetownnobleman

There is nothing illuminating here, no disclosure, and the personal details are wrong for Holmes. But ‘the town nobleman’ is also code name for diamonds–the card suit–in an obscure and complicated online game elsewhere, and The Riddler in the previous-franchise Batman movie attempted to steal diamonds.

Holmes had considerably more presence elsewhere online, but that item will be covered later; tomorrow if possible.

Meanwhile, the no-social-media-footprint meme is insta-myth.

False, not factual.

[One further update:]

Again for what it’s worth, Holmes may well have thought he resembles Carrey, and then of course there’s their first name.

Here is the familiar photo of Holmes.

James Holmes

Jim Carrey

2012 self funding and the state of Florida

Posted on by
Reply

More on self funding in 2012

 

Rick Scott

Self financing, once again, has not lighted up on the big board as one of the top political stories in 2012, and not merely because it is overshadowed by Mitt Romney’s refusal to disclose his tax returns. While there are some expensively self-financed mayor’s races, including in California–where, incidentally, more cities may soon declare bankruptcy than in any other state–the self-financing bug has simply not bitten in most big races.

 

Meg Whitman

Of the eleven governor’s races in 2012, only one involves major self financing. The gubernatorial primary in Missouri takes place Aug. 7, and so far, it looks as though the self-funding effort by David (Dave) Spence (R) is paying off. Spence has contributed more than $2 million to his gubernatorial effort and is competing for the GOP nomination against two candidates whose combined financial support does not equal his. The nominee will challenge incumbent Gov. Jay Nixon (D). Nobody claims that the copious self financing will make Spence a shoo-in for governor if he becomes the nominee. Spence was not projected to be the strongest potential nominee to begin with, and has gotten into trouble by  seeming to over-enhance his academic credentials in his resume. Calling a degree in Home Ec an economics degree may not be a crime but does have potential for generating effective television ads, and humor, about his candidacy.

 

Dave Spence, Missouri

Self financing in governor’s races in 2012 is dwarfed, of course, by the gargantuan tries for governor in 2010. Spence’s effort in Missouri comes to (so far) about one sixty-fourth the total contributed by Meg Whitman to her unsuccessful run against Jerry Brown in California. It comes to about one thirty-second the self financing by Rick Scott (R) in Florida, who won, contravening the predictions.

For further perspective, Spence’s self funding comes to about one eighteenth the amount donated to herself by Linda McMahon (R) in her unsuccessful senate race against Richard Blumenthal (D) in Connecticut.

Linda McMahon is back in the self-funding news again, running again for senator from Connecticut in 2012. Again, she is one of the top self funders according to the Center for Responsive Politics. It remains to be seen whether the self financing contributes more to a win, or to fuel more misogyny in politics.

A more noteworthy item is that the state of Florida is back in the self funding picture again in 2012. It’s not like Rick Scott’s run in 2010, not being written up much nationally, but Florida’s lengthy redistricting process, now theoretically complete, held up normal fundraising efforts for months. That doesn’t mean the money hasn’t come in. It just means that candidate money has been at least as important as usual in Florida, especially in the Florida state senate. Candidate self-financing looks to have kept some state senate campaigns going.

Another melancholy reflection of the use of redistricting delaying tactics, for the state GOP. I’ve seen the same thing in my home state of Texas. First the state party apparatus pushes through a redistricting plan that any attorney can see will not pass constitutional muster. (In Florida, by the way, the GOP is not the majority party by voter registration. It has a lock on the state government acquired through tactics, not through the ballot.) Then the state government, acting as a tool of the party apparatus, stonewalls, foot-drags and otherwise obstructs correction. Generally it pours more citizen money down the drain arguing the losing proposition in court. Then, once the courts have had their say and the state is mandated by law to fix the redistricting at least somewhat, it does exactly the minimum necessary to enable it to hold an election in November. Typically it blames the delay on the opposition–especially if the Dems file suit–and on ‘activist judges’ if not on judicial ‘tyranny’. (Money pays for the ad campaigns, remember.) Meanwhile, issuing ballots–including ballots mailed to overseas voters and to voters in the military–has been held up. The process determining placement of candidates’ names on the ballot has also been held up. And, of course, as long as the district lines are in flux/jeopardy, candidates’ ability to campaign effectively, or to raise funds, has also been held up.

This process of obstruction has disproportionate effect on money-strapped candidates or on comparatively disadvantaged candidates. Campaign fundraising is necessary for almost all people running for office. It is already dicier for challengers, for the minority party in the state legislature, for lesser known candidates and for candidates from poorer neighborhoods. Factor in undefined district boundaries, and it becomes more difficult.

A predominant note sounded after the 2010 elections was that, where candidate self funding is concerned, money cannot buy elections. True as far as it goes–see above, and the previous post–but money can, and does, have disproportionate impact gumming up the works for everyone else. It is at least as effective in buying the influence, behind the scenes, that obtains squirrelly redistricting proposals as in its more public form of campaign finance–where ironically it can call attention to a candidate’s shortcomings, or negatives, by highlighting them in the white-hot glare of big-bucks publicity.

Update August 10:

Sure enough, self funder Dave Spence won the Aug. 7 GOP gubernatorial primary in Missouri. Neither purely establishment GOPer nor pure tea-party outsider, Spence’s victory is something of an exception to the over-all pattern for self-financed candidates.

2012 self funded candidates: Going anywhere?

Posted on by
3

2012 self funded candidates

 

This year, with all the rightful attention to Mitt Romney’s undisclosed tax returns and other financial records, the spotlight has moved away temporarily from some other big money–several large self-funded campaigns for federal office. But a quick check into who is self-funding suggests that the phenomenon of self-funding is continuing to drain GOP prospects in fall. This suggestion should not be oversimplified or exaggerated. But so far, glittering vistas are not opening as the result of wealthy individuals’ pouring millions of their own money–or at least half a million–into their own campaigns. See below.

 

U.S. House:

Of the twelve top self funders in 2012, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, four faced each other in expensive house primaries in Texas and New York. David Alameel (D) in Texas 33rd, top self funder in the cycle at the time, lost his primary. Domingo Alberto Garcia, seventh in self funding, beat Alameel but faces Mark Veasey in a July 31 run-off. Jack Davis (R) in New York’s 26th lost his primary, possibly not well positioned anyway but further disadvantaged after scuffling with a cameraman. Jane Corwin (R)  successfully weathered the challenge from former Independent Davis and faces incumbent Kathy Hochul in the general election. Hochul , of course, won the congressional seat in a special election after previous incumbent Chris  Lee (R) aired shirtless photos of himself via craigslist.

Former Rep. Chris Lee, R-Conn.

Texas 33 generally votes D, New York 26 generally votes R. These two races fit the familiar pattern of people pouring money into races they think they can actually win.

Not all self-funded candidacies fit that pattern.

Davis and Corwin were # 2 and 3 respectively in amounts self funded. Number 4, Robert Pittenger (R) in North Carolina’s 9th, won the primary race Tuesday July 17 (yesterday) and will face Jennifer Roberts (D) and Curtis Campbell (I) in the general. Numbers 5 and 6, John K. Delaney (D) and Mark Greenberg (R), won their respective primaries in Maryland’s 6th and Connecticut’s  5th.

Maryland 6 and Connecticut 5 are both iffy, though the Maryland district is much less so.

 

p

Scott Peters

Number 8 on the house self funding list, Independent Bill Bloomfield, faces incumbent Rep. Henry Waxman in California 33. New rules–CA now has a top-two structure in place. Waxman is still favored. Under the same system, Scott Peters (D) in California’s 52nd will face incumbent Rep. Brian Bilbray (R) in November. Peters and Craig Huey in California’s 36th were ninth and tenth among self funders.

Looks as though CA new top-two rule has done nothing so far to diminish the importance of money in politics, or to invigorate intra-party challenges to incumbents.

Number eleven on the self funder list, Suzan DelBene (D) in Washington 1, is the remaining candidate still facing a primary, also under a top-two rule. Hers will take place Aug. 7. Number twelve, Joseph Carvin (R) in New York 17, won his primary and will face incumbent Rep. Nita Lowey (D).

 

U.S. Senate:

In Senate races as in House, two of the top ten 2012 self-funders faced each other in Texas. Top self-funder David Dewhurst (R) bested #4 Thomas Leppert (R) among others in the primary and now faces Ted Cruz in the July 31 run-off. Two others faced each other in Pennsylvania, where #2 Tom Smith (R) was defeated by #9 Steven Welch. He is running against incumbent Sen. Bob Casey, Jr (D).

 

Wil Cardon

Of the other top senate self funders, #3 Wil Cardon (R) in Arizona, #5 Eric Hovde (R) in Wisconsin, #6 Linda McMahon (R) in Connecticut and #7 John Brunner (R) in Wisconsin are still in primary races. Cardon is challenging Sen. Jeff Flake; Flake is possibly not aided by some remarks just released by the Flake campaign. Hovde, just endorsed by FreedomWorks, is running against former Rep. Mark Neumann and former Gov. Tommy Thompson. The winner of the heated primary will face Dem nominee [ ] Tammy Baldwin.  McMahon faces Chris Shays August 14, to run for the seat being vacated by Sen. Joe Lieberman.  Sarah Steelman in the crowded Missouri GOP field leading to August 7 was just endorsed by Sarah Palin, if that makes a difference. The winner challenges Sen. Claire McCaskill (D).

Last two spots on the top-ten self funder list for 2012: Greg Sowards (R) defeated Rep. Heather Wilson for the GOP nomination for U.S. Senate in New Mexico, and Julien Modica (D) withdrew before the Virginia primary, won by former Gov. Tim Kaine.

 

Heather Wilson

A few simple patterns emerge, with few surprises.

  • All the top self funders in Senate races, or victorious self funders, are Republicans.
  • The sword may cut both ways, however; of the six victorious GOP self funders in Senate races, four are still running strong in their party’s primaries.
  • Of the six, nominees in five states are or will be in iffy senate races–Arizona, Connecticut, Missouri, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. One take-away here is to keep an eye out for election rules and other election tactics to suppress the vote in these states (as in Florida).
  • More of the top self funders in House races are Democrats.
  • Self-funded Democratic nominees have a higher win ratio than self funded Republican nominees. That is, if they manage to get through the nomination process, they have a statistically better shot at winning the general. That may be partly a function of more negative Dem attitude toward self funders running for office than GOPers have (in general).
  • Women self funders do not fare better than other women or better than other self funders. It looks as though any negative perception of self funding tends to work more harshly against a woman candidate, just as a negative perception of pennilessness tends to work more harshly against a woman candidate, other things being equal. Male self funders do not fare better than other men candidates but do fare better than women self funders.
  • The state of New York, as ever, demonstrates premier ability to match candidates against each other with extraneous factors level: wealth runs on par with wealth, just as ethnicity tends to meet similar ethnicity, etc. The occasional exception–Jonathan Tasini taking on Hillary Clinton–does nothing to disprove the general rule.

Of the eighteen current top self funders in races for House and Senate, only three at this point look like strong bets to win their elections–Brad Sherman and Scott Peters in California, and Domingo Garcia in Texas.

This kind of guess, of course, is lightweight in some ways despite the destructiveness of money in politics. But it is a reminder that money is not the only thing in the picture. The interplay of media reporting and other media representations with political campaigns is part of the public discourse.

Take 2010, for example. Numerous prognosticators suggested that 2010 would not be a good year for Democrats nationally, and the broad suggestion was right. Predictions about self funding, that year, were less on the nose.

Broadly, here is the pattern of media representations in that cycle. Big pop-news periodicals–specifically U.S. News and USA Today–began with pretty rosy assessments for candidates with more money than Creosote, as they say in P. G. Wodehouse. Here is a May 13, 2010, piece from USNews, and here is a June 22, 2010, piece from USAToday.

The assessment was shared by some progressive publications, less rosily. Here for example is the estimable Washington Independent Aug. 4.

On the other hand, on June 23 the Seattle Post Globe weighed in with a more detached assessment drawn from history, as did Poynter on Aug. 2.

The Center for Responsive Politics crunched the mixed numbers for self funders on Oct. 6. This analysis was quickly followed by similar treatment of the topic in American Prospect on Oct. 8.

With election returns and hard numbers in, the Center for Responsive Politics published a quick results list for self funders on Nov. 3, followed, quickly again, by a WashPost article the next day to the same effect.

Update August 10:

In Missouri August 7, Rep. Todd Akin defeated the self-financing candidate among others to take on Sen. Claire McCaskill. A good editorial on the senate race shaping up is found here. Another win for far-righters–not that Akin was the only one–and another loss for self financers.

Political Animals hurting

Posted on by
Reply

Political Animals?

 

Weaver in Political Animals

Sigourney Weaver is terrific. She was terrific in Alien, where she started with a script not pointedly rewritten for a woman from the man’s part originally envisioned. She was good even in fluffy Galaxy Quest, and in Ghostbusters I and II, more earnest fluff; good as a damsel-in-distress psychologist and target-of-serial-killer in Copycat with Holly Hunter; impressively off-putting as boss-lady vis-a-vis Melanie Griffith in Working Girl. She’s even played a first lady before, in Dave, the movie starring Evan Bayh look-alike Kevin Kline in dual roles as president and lovable smurfy impostor-president.

Kline, Weaver in Dave

So did Weaver get a chance to look at the script of Political Animals?

As suggested by the plot line in Dave, a narrow attention to political realism is not indispensable in political movies. That said, still–what happened with Political Animals? We’ve got some great actors–Weaver, Ellen Burstyn and Carla Gugino are doing a good job, so far, with what they’ve got. We’ve got a tempting story line, ripped from the Clintons’ life story if grafted smarmily onto North Carolina for that extra frisson. Reading between the lines is not necessary, nuance not called for; this is a straight-out guilty-pleasure type proffer, your B-flat summer serialized television movie.

Hinds in yore-ish days

I lasted fifteen minutes. If they don’t kill off Bud (Ciaran Hinds), the former president and philandering husband–even if they have to use that hallucinatory cliche of a heart attack during sex–they’ve lost me for good. Bud is not a retread of Bill Clinton, the character whose biography his resembles. He is a retread of Jack Stanton, the presidential candidate in Joe Klein’s Primary Colors–the stereotypical hog-wallow Southern politician who cannot speak without being smutty, who has no other button settings than folksy and brutal, and whose accent is like nothing heard on this earth including in North Carolina. Maybe the producers spent so much on talent above the line that they didn’t have the budget for a good dialect coach, but if someone doesn’t tell Hollywood (USA network) that there are other ways to convey regional background than a caricature of dialect and lexicon, yet more harm will ensue for this nation’s intellectual infrastructure.

Side note: Inevitable question– Could you do better? Yes, I could. But first I’d rather convey to Sandra Bullock the role she was born to play. I have it in mind. Call any time.

Speaking of hallucinatory cliches, there are three plot devices that unfailingly flag the bum writer, or the writer/team taking a day off and phoning it in. In film or literature, movies or books, high- or low-brow, they work the same:

  • The up-in-the-air ending, otherwise known as the cop-out, where the resolution is not rounded off, not defined, but left undecided with some unmeaning thing they call ambiguity. One partial exception to this general rule is John Fowles’ The French Lieutenant’s Woman, where the author works so hard on the alternatives that the reader has more of an ending, rather than less as in Fear of Flying and Primary Colors, and more recently (I hear) The Sopranos. I like ambiguity as much as anyone does, but ambiguity and resolution are not mutually exclusive. If you want to go more than one direction with the ending, do it like Beethoven in Symphony #5, not with a coin toss as a pretentious substitute for authorial decision.
  • The actress-playing-herself for a bit within the story, as in an episode of the old Jackie Gleason show The Honeymooners where Audrey Meadows came on as herself-as-movie-star, and recently with Julia Roberts doing the same in Ocean’s Twelve. Everybody needs a rest, including writers, but there’s a limit.
  • Last and worst, that laugh-or-cry disaster for esthetic unity and substitute for form, the ending where the main character wakes up and it was all just a dream. Shakespeare used this device only to a limited extent, and with a complicated twist that freshened it, even back in the sixteenth century, in The Taming of the Shrew; the monumental Wizard of Oz put it away in 1939; it should be retired like a won-too-many-times trophy–until a genius thinks of a brilliant way to re-use it.

As hinted above, obviously these three devices do not exhaust the list of things to get wrong only on a grand scale or not use.

One can add played-out stereotypes and bad, BAD accents to the list. Any time you’ve got a character in a suit speaking as though through a mouthful of grits, and calling everything a son-of-a-bitch at that–why do writers relentlessly have their Southerner characters Son-of-a-bitching all the time?–you’ve probably got a letdown on your hands.

Granted, not everything can be The Good Wife, where the Julianna Margulies character could be an allegorical figure called Aplomb and the writers have actual vocabulary skills; or as sharply presented as Burn Notice. But can’t we have some action with a little class, a little bit of originality? How about a lawyer on the toilet or a large dog escaping the flames?