-
Catholic Culture In America
May 23, 2013 | 33 comments
-
Earth Day 2013: The Papal Edition
April 22, 2013 | 22 comments
-
Is God a Methodist?
April 15, 2013 | 57 comments
-
A Status Quo Budget at Best
April 11, 2013 | 9 comments
-
Marriage Issue Will Not Go Away
April 2, 2013 | 87 comments
A Further Perspective
Raking Fire on the Stern
The GOP’s kaleidoscopic primary gets serious.
While reading a tale of adventure and combat on the high seas, say a novel by Patrick O’Brian or C.S. Forester, I can recall a vivid description of two ships of the line, engaged in a deadly duel, in which one of the vessels manages to inflict a particularly crushing fusillade on its opponent, described in a phrase both gripping and terrifying: “raking fire on the stern.”
Since all the guns in the ships of the Napoleonic era were on the sides, the stern was particularly vulnerable and the continuous fire brought to bear on it was devastating. Of course, if the attacker was not careful, he might be outmaneuvered and find himself at the mercy of his previously vulnerable opponent.
For reasons not very hard to fathom, thoughts of raking fire and other unpleasant things seem to impinge on my consciousness while considering the Republican presidential primary.
The GOP contest is getting serious. Amateur night is over. There are basically two contenders, meaning no disrespect to Senator Santorum who has conducted himself honorably while articulating values important to this writer at least.
However, we also have a contender who, like Napoleon, has been in extended exile for many years, and now has returned to Paris, scratch that, South Carolina and points south, to rally the populace against an opponent he seeks to smear as the embodiment of money-grubbing capitalism who, horrors, does not pay more taxes than the law requires of him. Moreover, that opponent, the capitalist that is, was a successful one who garnered efficiencies, generated growth, multiplied jobs and created value for investors — including pension funds which, gentle reader, you may have some stake in seeing prosper.
It is obvious, but nevertheless important, to note that our latter-day Napoleon does not cite any violations of law or ethics that would anyway impugn the integrity of his target. Still, he generates a lot of smoke to create the impression that something must be wrong, after all, the fellow made a lot of money, right? He has become a stalking horse of Obama and the Democrats.
Of course, this neo-Napoleon also made a lot of money, although a lot less than the target of his demagogic attacks. But just about every dollar he earned, with the exception of a few books he coauthored, was basically built on whatever residual influence, maybe even some insight, he might have in or on our imperial city on the Potomac. What exactly was the value added to the commonwealth by holding hands for various large corporations or playing court historian for the proximate cause of our housing market meltdown — for $1.6 million!
Full disclosure time: In June, on this very website, I opined that “Newt has not yet come to grips with the fact that he is a dead man walking.” I got that one wrong. That comes from living in Washington for ten years, I guess. In truth, I did not think much of the former Speaker of the House before his most recent tirades against free market actors such as Governor Romney. Here’s a test: of his countless ideas, schemes, programs and other pronouncements, name two of Newt Gingrich’s top ideas which ring your bell. I mean other than his shot at GOP House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) for social engineering.
In retrospect, Ryan’s retort to Gingrich appears to have been prophetic. “With allies like that, who needs the left,” quipped Ryan.
Newt has certainly risen from the dead, but what we have now is a fellow who is willing to destroy the most crucial argument for removing President Obama and his congressional caucus from power and subvert the fundamental premise of the party of Lincoln: the need to restore primacy to the free market and civil society, without undue burdens of taxation and regulation, which is essential for liberty to prevail in the land of the free.
Even if Newt Gingrich wins the primary, he will certainly lose in November, not just because of historically low approval ratings, but because he has undermined the very rationale for Republican governance.
I live in Virginia where Gingrich did not make it on the ballot, which will relieve me of the temptation to cast a purely negative vote. I will, be voting for Mitt Romney. He has succeeded where the former Speaker did not — in the realms of family and commerce.
About the Author
G. Tracy Mehan, III served at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in the administrations of both Presidents Bush. He is a consultant in Arlington, Virginia, and an adjunct professor at George Mason University School of Law.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (74) | Leave a comment
More Articles by G. Tracy Mehan, III
More Articles From A Further Perspective
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/01/27/raking-fire-on-the-stern
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Inside the Gates of Eden
- Downton’s Class System — and Ours
- We Have Her Example
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Nemo| 1.27.12 @ 6:30AM
Wrong, wrong, wrong! The US does NOT primarily require a successful businessman at this
critical srage of its history. It needs a man of ideas, who understands history and ideology, and understands why it was important - even though it made no economic sense at the time! - to send Columbus to America in 1492 or to an establish an American base base on the moon now. Churchill was a mediocre economist at best, but his times, like ours called for an historian who could think big before an economist.
Vern Crisler | 1.27.12 @ 9:14AM
Thanks Nemo for responding to Mehan's drivel. Mehan's reasons for voting for a president -- family and commerce -- are unbelievably irrelevant in today's world. It's nice if a candidate has a good family and has made some money at business, but these are hardly qualifications that enable a man to be President.
As it stands Romney may have a good family and may have made millions, but he makes the mistake of running on these things instead of running on ideas. That's why Romney is ultimately an empty suit. As I've said before, Romney probably things Ludwig von Mises was a writer of symphonies, and if you asked him about Hayek, he would probably say, "Who's Hayek?"
Al Adab| 1.27.12 @ 10:43AM
An ampty suit is what we currently have. What would be the point in replacing that one with one from the other party who stands for compromise and accomodation instead of principle? Romnay presents a distinction without a difference. If he represents the "last stand" of the old line republican party then good riddence. The nation needs a decisive, knowledgeable President, not a business as usual one.
All the GOP candidates need to sit down together in the proverbial smoke filled room, stop damaging each other and their party, and decide from among a wider field or GOP leaders who can present the case and defeat the incumbant. Put the egos aside and save this nation and the liberty of mankind.
Boar Hunter| 1.27.12 @ 12:11PM
Thank you sir,
First let me say that I always find your input reasonable and accurate. It helps that I agree with your views, but that does seem to be secondary in merit when weighed against the kind and reasonable tone you bring to the public debate.
Although my passionate nature causes me to fail miserably on most occasions, I strive to mimic the gentlemanly tone of your discourse.
I have not decided for certain (Palin changed my mind last time), but, for the first time in 34 years, I will likely not be voting.
Since it is a given, in my mind at least, that the Obama administration has thousands of like minded people to positions of authority, accommodation will simply slow the inevitable.
By extension, if acceptance of and submission to the policies put in place by Obama and his minions is Republican the policy, then count me out.
The Romney camp has already stated Obama care will not be overturned. Why would they try? Romney is obviously of like mind on the issue which is a death knell for our country.
Since it is apparently too much to ask that anyone ever be held accountable under the law, perhaps it would ease my mind for the liberals to be confronted by the disaster of Obama and the Republicans shamed by what they allowed.
Reagan brought both sides together, we will never see another Reagan. I fear the next leader will be seeking the destruction of the opposition. I fear the course we are on now reminds me too much of something I once heard about the tree of liberty.
Renaissance Nerd | 1.27.12 @ 1:08PM
Time to move to France, y'all. Surrendering before a shot is fired is not generally considered the American style. Romney has stated that his first order of business is to repeal Obamacare, and Coleman is not his lord and master, and stated his opinion of the political reality. It will probably be very hard to repeal Obamacare, it may even be impossible to get rid of it all. The part that's already functioning, allowing those with preexisting conditions to buy insurance, is popular, though economically ridiculous. If they get rid of everything else, and keep that one piece, it's not 100% repealed. But why am I arguing? Ersatz patriots are beyond the reach of reason.
Al Adab| 1.27.12 @ 1:35PM
RN:
His campaign side just the other day, that they seek to edit and replace portions of Obie-care not to repeal and end it. That is the very signature of the dangerous tendencies toward compromise which frightens us about this candidate.
Boar Hunter| 1.27.12 @ 5:10PM
Dear RN,
Remind me again who in the Republican party challenged Obama on his admitted drug use? His associations with terrorists, attending a racist church for 20 years, associating with the Blank Panthers at their lets all go kill some white babies rallies? Who was that I don't recall?
Who inquired about his being born the bastard child of a communist mother? Who asked about his being mentored by communists and those who love communism throughout his life? Romney is viciously attacked for his Mormon beliefs, who on "our side" has had the courage to even inquire about the extent of Obama's ties to and continued love affair with Islam.
McCain offered up proof of his eligibility for office because the left demanded it. Who demanded Obama prove his eligibility? Who demanded Obama's records of anything he has ever done except vote present? As a result, Obama's eligibility is still in question by a whole lot of people. Oh I know they are nut's and racists of course, but don't you think it odd that since Obama took office 19 states have undertaken legislation to require proof of eligibility from anyone seeking the office of the president? Why was it that no one on our side ever cleared up the issue and demanded Obama be vetted before being allowed to even run?
For years now, going way back before Obama, I have been disgusted by the trend of trying to be nice while they eviscerate conservatives with lies and never ending attacks. And you have the nerve to depict me as a coward?
Perhaps you should try and change the minds of some of those in the Ron Paul cult, or better yet why not fleas and locusts in the democrat party? I'm certain they have nothing to do with the impending disaster of the next election. Rather than attack those like me who are simply fed up with the spineless cowards on the Republican side like Romney who refuse to stand for anything, even themselves.
Romney is a coward. A gutless spineless coward, there is no man in him. If the Republican's run him against Obama I won't vote. In doing so I am voting. I am voting for the Republican party to run a leader for a change.
The cowards in the Republican party did nothing to prevent Obama from being elected because of their image of that whole black thing. Cowards, they stood by and have watched as Obama rammed Obama care down the throats of the American people. Cowards they have stood by and watched the dismantling of America by this Marxist piece of human fecal matter. Now the cowards who brought all this about and stood idly by and watched it all have you to berate me for withdrawing my support from them?
You sir may with all due respect kiss my hairy white ass.
You may support these cowards, I do not. Time after time the Republicans cave on budget issues taking about how we must get along. I do not get along well with evil and I believe people like you, those who allow evil to flourish by continuing to vote for the "lesser of two evils" are doing just that. Evil is evil and I for one am withdrawing my support for it. Go ahead and vote for your man and see where it gets you I'm sure the Republican party will by happy to have you along.
Dmitry Aleksandrovich| 1.28.12 @ 2:37AM
There's only one Republican response to Obamacare and that is to break the AMA monopoly and the get the insurance industry out of health care completely. Then hospitals and doctors will have to offer a competative price to patients its the same with pharmaceuticals. Get the insurance agencies out and the pharmaceutical giants will have to dramatically lower their prices. The only other option to that is complete socialized medicine (national health care). I don't see there being any in between. The way it is now the insurance companies have it rigged and the healthcare industry knows insurance will pay up so they charge rediculously high rates for their services and we the people are the ones who get screwed.
Al Adab| 1.27.12 @ 1:23PM
Boar:
Thank you for the compliment and courtesy of your reply. It would be sad, and ultimately destructive of Liberty, to elect an administration which seeks only to accomodate the damage which this administration has perpetrated. Fire the Czars as well. There simply can be no compromise with this evil (and we should not fear to call it such) for that only slows the decline and does nothing to reverse it. The partys today stand in opposition to one another. The once great and patriotic Dem. party is no more. It simply exists to further its own power not to provide an acceptable government for a free nation.
If we as a people have decided that Liberty is no longer the first priority then it may be that we are to late. But at least history can record that when the choice between freedom and tyranny was presented, there remained many who chose their freedom, their birthright, over creature conforts and government pottage. Our national condition requires a groundchange and we should reject any justification of what has ocurred.
Dave Williams| 1.27.12 @ 5:50PM
NNNNOOOOOOOOoooooooo, I am no fan of Romney, but do you REALLY want to see Comrade O nominating more Supreme Court justices???? Please do NOT stay at home on 12/6/12!!!!!
JJ| 1.27.12 @ 7:10PM
Wasn't it the Romney advisor Sununu who recommended to George Bush that he appoint Souter? There is no guarentee that Romney will do better.
KennesawJack| 1.27.12 @ 10:57PM
But he can't do worse.
W| 1.28.12 @ 12:14PM
It is difficult to predict how they will act once on the supreme court. Remember Ike appointed Warren and Brennan, the two most liberal justices. Kennedy appointed Byron White, who turned out to be a conservative. White was an All American football player who played for the Pgh Steelers. Ford appointed Stevens, a very liberal justice. Reagan appointed Kennedy and O'Connor, both "moderates." Bush 1 appointed Souter, a lib, but also appointed Thomas. Bush 2 had better luck with Roberts and Alito.
Obama and Clinton's picks are all straight down the line liberals.
David T| 1.30.12 @ 3:01PM
What a great campaign slogan for Romney:
Mitt: He Can't Do Worse
Patrick| 1.27.12 @ 12:21PM
Gingrich is popular for all the reasons that Trump was. He's a pompous jackass. Time and truth are catching up with him, so we look for yet another Not-Romney.
JJ| 1.27.12 @ 7:06PM
What if right after Romney wins the primaries two women come forward and says that Romney had sex with them? What do these people do who have been chastising us for voting for Newt do? What do the people who immediately stated that Cain needs to drop out of the race do?
It could well happen. That's the trap these people have set.
As far as bringing back a viable space program. Why does going to the moon make sense in 1962, but not make any sense 50 years later. Seriously we are suffering from myopia.
Quartermaster| 1.27.12 @ 8:06PM
Lincoln was part of the crony capitalist cabal of his time. He was their tool. The Republican Party began as a left wing party, and has remained such.
Mike Hawk| 1.27.12 @ 6:59AM
We do not require a politically 'moderate' businessman to manage the emerging socialist state. We need a leader to lead the counrty away from it. There is a debilitating lack of leadership in theGOP Establishment and the base is fed up.
Brian Mc| 1.27.12 @ 7:26AM
You nailed it, Hawk. How do you get around the establishment with the Republic at stake? We are fighting everything coming out of D.C. with no weaponry...rake the stern, yeah right!
Harry the Horrible| 1.27.12 @ 7:19AM
Brilliant.
Vote for the former governor of the MOST LIBERAL STATE IN THE UNION! Who left his state with millstone around its neck in the form of health care costs and destroyed the state's GOP.
That'll fix Obama.
John - TMF| 1.27.12 @ 7:26AM
Herbert Hoover was a businessman. It is no guarantee of any quality of governance whatsoever. Besides, big business and finance is brimming with Democrats looking for goodies and favors from the public trough.
Romney voted for Jimmy Carter against Ronald Reagan, and then Walter Mondale against Ronald Reagan again. He wasn't even a Republican until it was convenient to be one. He needed to sucker a political party into getting him on the ballot in the Peoples' Republic of Massachusetts. The nomination for which he ran to the Left of Teddy Kennedy.
As a plurality governor he helped sign into law the blueprint legislative package for Obamacare. Romneycare is drowning the Mass. State budget, and rationing care.
He forced "Gay Marriage" into existence in that state, and by the time his last year in office rolled around, he was so unpopular he chose not to run, all to preserve his political viability (a loss would doom him) for his perpetual run for the Oval Office.
Romney is pro-gun control, his assertions to the contrary are false.
Romney is pro-abortion, I don't believe him at all when he says that he had a "change of heart". His policies don't match his promises.
Romney nominated Liberal judges to the Massachusetts courts.
Romney makes excuses in regard to the quality of his dealing with the Massachusetts legislature are proof of his timidity.
Romney's "team" is the cream of the GOP Establishment crop(crap); endorsed by Bobdole, Presidential Loser and "Tax Collector for the Welfare State".
He is a Limousine Liberal Democrat Wall Street Financier and I will not and shall not vote for him under any circumstances. He is political party suicide for the GOP and will immediately begin failing the party faithful, who held their noses to vote against Obozo, if Politbot even wins.
He's conning the GOP, and bribing it with lots of lovely money...
I can't be bought, and see through the con. I shall not vote for Willard Milton Romney for anything, under any circumstances.
Gingrich or bust.
-The Mighty Fahvaag
PS.
(If Santorum can pull off the nomination I will be happy to vote for him in the Presidential Election. I may not vote for either Gingrich or Santorum in the primary due to a badly flawed/corruptible ballot access system in Virginia.)
Al Adab| 1.27.12 @ 10:38AM
How many times do so many of us have to repeat that Romney, like his father before him, has stood in opposition to the Conservative Movement his entire career? He is no Conservative, he is simply another in a long line of accomodationist republicans who have failed this nation - and have lost elections - time and again. His first day in office he would meet with the DEM Congressional leadership to try and "cross the aisle". IFF is s significant feature of modern warfare and should be in our current political clime.
Rob Seabrook| 1.27.12 @ 7:28AM
And Romney will lose to Obama because the independents and youth won't vote for him. God I hope Gary Johnson names Ron Paul as his running mate. That would really shake things up!
Dick Nome| 1.27.12 @ 8:18AM
Dream on. Rube Paul is an old crackpot and is retiring after November.
Occam's Tool| 1.27.12 @ 11:35AM
Yes. The pot growers ideal gruesome twosome.
albert constantine jr.| 1.27.12 @ 7:39AM
To sort of stick with the theme from which the article draws its title, I remember watching the Russell Crowe "Masters & Commanders" naval flick a few years back. As the film has you rooting for the British ship against the fleet of "that Raggedy Ass Napoleon", it eventually occurred to me that these were the guys we wound up fighting a couple of years later in the War of 1812 (they must have edited away the scene of crew members being illegally pressed into service from American ships).
I think a relevant point would be that those who hold your sympathies today might shift in the not too distant future. I voted for Romney in the 2008 primary as the remaining alternative against McCain. He is not my first choice in this round. I donated to Newt throughout the mid-90s as the man who was taking Congress from the Democrats for the first time in 40 years. He is not my first choice this round, either.
To complete the circuit, though, it is not lost on me that the adversary of 1775-83 and 1812-15 was the staunch ally of 1917-18 , 1941-45 and beyond.
Jeremiah Smirking| 1.27.12 @ 8:06AM
I agree with the previous posters... your article blows.
POST American| 1.27.12 @ 8:34AM
-----Yeah, a kaliedoscope of capstone
smile buttons.
But take heart ---
OVER 74% of ALLLL donations from the
military are going to ---RON PAUL.
AS the REALITY of the Globalist RED China
TREASON OP dawns ---------again, take heart.
POST American| 1.27.12 @ 8:39AM
----------------------------P.S.-----------------------------
AND speaking of things Napoleonic,
is everyone noticing? --Hollywood has
not only obediantly BALKED the awesomely
relevant ----60th Anniversary of the
-------------------KOREAN WAR-----------------
(even as mind control, the RED China Halocaust,
Globalist TREASON and EUGENICS ---loom)
---the 200th Anniversary of another Globalist
police state power grab's defeat
(NAPOLEON at MOSCOW 1812)
---was ALSO completely 'overlooked'.
$$$$$$trange. . .
albert constantine jr.| 1.27.12 @ 8:59AM
------and speaking of the Korean War, the best TV character ever, Jim Rockford (played by the able James Garner, who also was himself) was a Korean War Vet------ (cue Mike Post and the harmonica)
W| 1.27.12 @ 12:00PM
Albert,
Garner also was great in the WWII movie "The Great Escape."
Rockford is now on cable daily and is one of my all time favorites. I just noticed in the credits that one of the writers/producers/directors was David Chase, who did Sopranos. The Chase Rockford shows had some New Jersey minor mafia guys with the same edgy humor of Sopranos. And some of the Rockford actors appeared on Sopranos, Joe Santos and the actor who played Anthony boy on Rockford.
albert constantine jr.| 1.27.12 @ 10:38PM
Anthony Boy Gaglio was played George Loros in three different episodes (#63 and 64, and #103, all written by Chase), and Mr. Loros also played two different characters in three additional episodes (#74 as Tommy Lorentz written by Chase and 110 and 111 as Eddie, written by Chase). Chase came in in season three of the Rockford Files as a producer, and wrote a number of episodes, as noted above.
By the way, if you were to watch Episode 117 again, there is a character in that episode (which was supposed to be a pilot about 2 Jersey guys trying to ingratiate themselves with the mob that Chase recycled for the Sopranos) named Albert Constantine, who introduced Albert Constantine, Jr.
W| 1.27.12 @ 11:31PM
Albert,
The show with the two Jersey guys was on last night. It was the episode where the two guys rented a house next to Rocky , they were having a party to celebrate getting Unemployment Compensation from New Jersey, and Rockford was accused of killing one of the guests. One was Coniglio. I know they appeared in later episodes when they wanted to join the mob . Great series. Angel was great. Beth the lawyer was hot.
I liked the episode with Tom Selleck as the perfect squeaky clean detective, reminds me of Romney, and Louis Gossett as the fast talking devious detective, reminds me of ..........?
Were you on the show! Is the series on DVD, would like to get it.
albert constantine jr.| 1.28.12 @ 12:00AM
Actually, episode 90 was called the Jersey Bounce, and it was set in So Cal instead of Jersey. It was also written by David Chase, and though the Jersey guys (Mickey Long and Eugene Conigliaro) are villains in this episode, Chase decided to hope the audience could suffer collective amnesia, and re-introduced the same actors as the same characters the next season (this time in Newark, NJ) in order to do a show about a couple of guys trying to ingratiate themselves with the mob.
It didn't work (in season 5, they went to jail for murder after the neighbor dispute with Jim, now they were back as themselves/ somebody else interacting with Rockford in a different place with the same accents). The second episode (#117) was called a Couple of Guys, and the Rockford Files aired one more episode before it was cancelled, but it supplied me with a working nom du cyber.
Oddly enough, Chase got to bring out his theme for the pilot (and several other episodes of Rockford that he wrote) when he did the Sopranos. In season one, as a tribute, he tasks Big Pussy to find his son's teacher's stole car, and Vincent Pastore responds "What am I-Rockford". Also, when he was searching for a nursing home for his mother, they visit the day room of one of the institutions, and the residents are gathering around the TV as "The Rockford Files" theme plays.
The characters played by Lilo Brancato and Chris Tardio who try to assassinate Michael Imperioli's character strongly resemble Long and Conigliaro.
David Proval was in one of the Rockford File movies from the mid 90s. Also in both series were Joe Santos, as you noted, and George Loros. I kept waiting for Philip Margolin to pop up in a cameo as Angel, but it never happened.
W| 1.28.12 @ 8:41AM
Albert,
Thanks for the info. Rockford has a strong following. I saw Beth on a Taxi as the blind date for Sam, but unfortunately she had aged and did not look as hot as she did on Rockford. I also liked the episode with the Willie Nelson character with Willie singing and the Isaac Hayes/Lou Gosett shows and the Tom Selleck shows.
Is there a book or magazine that has the episodes described?
albert constantine jr.| 1.28.12 @ 10:44AM
Most of the episodes are available on DVD. An author named Ed Robertson put out a book in the mid 90s entitled "This is Jim Rockford...The Rockford Files". When A&E had the series in syndication, they would advertise the book, and I wound up getting it as a Christmas gift in 1998. It has been well used in the last decade and a half. There are the casts and plots of each episode, and the back stories on how the shows developed.
Isaac Hayes debuted in the second season as Gandolph "Gandy" Fitch in Episode 36, The Hammer of C Block, as a prison acquaintance of Rockford. Lou Gossett Jr. also appeared later that season as Rockford's sleazy former parole officer Marcus Hayes in Episode 43.
In season 3 Episode 61 the two appeared together in what was also supposed to be a pilot for a spinoff series. NBC did not show any interest, though the scene where they drop in at the Nazi bar is a classic, and Lou Gossett gets a great line about the importance of the middle class.
Hayes did also appear as Gandolph Fitch in Season Four Episode 70.
Tom Selleck's appearance as Lance White in Season 5 Episode 91 was a hilarious episode, and his reappearance in the role in the last season Episode 113 marked a pre Magnum PI collaboration with Selleck and Larry Manetti.
I remember watching the Willie Nelson episode when it debuted to open Season 5 in September of 1988. Oddly enough, that was the season that Gretchen Corbett's character Beth was written out of the series in a contract dispute.
W| 1.28.12 @ 11:07AM
In 1975 I worked at a firm with an attorney who was a big fan of Rockford. He told one client his fee was $200 a day plus expenses. Of course this was 1975 and he did it as a favor.
Thanks for the info. I will look for the book and DVD. Most of my friends like Rockford but our wives are indifferent.
skip| 1.28.12 @ 12:28PM
Once upon a time, on a two lane road at 45 mph, I could successfully emulate that signature Rockfish technique of performing a 180 degree change in direction all while in continuous motion. Certainly one of my proudest life achievements.
W - which channel has been currently airing Rockfish?
a.c. jr. - any chance of one of your literary tour de force odes for Rockfish?
That show ironically captured our current political dilemma, with Rockfish, the conservative, dealing with reality by using reason and experience, and Angel, the liberal, capable only of emotionally prattling with nothing but lies and stupidity.
W| 1.28.12 @ 1:36PM
We have Verizon Fios. Chanel 465, MeTV, at 5:00PM. this channel has lot of old shows, such as Combat, Kojak, Gunsmoke. This is info for Pittsburgh.
Right about Angel, always the quick, easy con.
albert constantine jr.| 1.28.12 @ 7:58PM
A correction to above, "Heartaches of a Fool" was first debuted in 1978, not 88, as I mis-typed.
Skip, I hadn't thought of a poetic tribute, but now the wheels are turning. The mention that you and W have made of Angel seems a good starting point. I'll have to see if I can string one together that does the show justice.
albert constantine jr.| 1.28.12 @ 9:16PM
Here's my attempt on short notice as I watch 2012 on FX:
In the days that followed Nixon
When the world’s hard shell got harder
We were left with Gerald Ford
Only Georgians knew of Carter
There was an absence of a hero
Who could help you breach life’s fences
But if you had two hundred bucks
Per diem plus expenses
A knight of sorts you’d hire
Who might not be afraid
But even when he worked through fear
Most times he was not paid
And often when he broke the case
His dad would play a part in
But just as likely was sold out
By his cellmate Angel Martin
With cop friend Becker, lawyer Beth
Sometimes he could break clean
And make it to his trailer
and check out the phone machine
A snub nose in the cookie jar
And a mobile printing press
To make a phony business card
And reluctant folks impress
And when the bad guys got too close
And wanted what he heard
He’d lead them on a big chase
In his tan Firebird
For more than half a decade
That gripped most in malaise
The 70s economy
The end of Carter’s days
For one short hour every week
We’d see this private eye
Fight bumblers like Chapman
The mob and FBI
The con men and the CIA
His old cell mates and dregs
His clients oft were losers
Or models with long legs
Or buddies from the old days
Who just dropped in to see ya
With lots of modern problems
and their memories of Korea
and just for sixty minutes
you’d forget about inflation
and ever rising prime rates
as you watched Jim’s situation
You’d get to think at the first ring
At the start of the phone call
How will Angel trip Jim up
Like Lucy and the football
And as the decade ended
So too did the show
But soon came Ronald Reagan
And Carter got to go
But Jim came back to most of us
Throughout a grateful nation
For in that time began a run
In endless syndication
So in new times of trouble
As you face a teeming horde
You can take an hour off
It starts “This is Jim Rockford”
W| 1.28.12 @ 11:29PM
Albert,
Excellent. We will nominate you for a Pulitzer, and at the least as poet laureate of AmSpec.
Seriously, very good.
You should write (c) copyright after your poems. You should send it to Jim Garner. Your poem reminded me of the episode where his Korean war buddy,now CIA, showed up in Hawaii to ruin Rockford's vacation.
skip| 1.29.12 @ 11:45AM
Excellent.
In the days that followed Reagan
When liberty was much rarer
We were left without even Jimbo
What could be less fairer
Well at least there still are forums
Where valued is freedom of speech thus
And we're blessed with such excellent wits
Who have much to teach us
Thanks guys - for the info, the entertainment, and the memories.
W| 1.29.12 @ 1:32PM
Good work, skip. I can't write poetry.
We need to do a Rockford festival
skip| 1.29.12 @ 3:22PM
W, I can't either.
I just emulated a.c. jr.
albert constantine jr.| 1.29.12 @ 7:49PM
BTW, I watched a few Sopranos episodes on A & E today which featured Greg Antonacci (Eugene Conigliaro from Episodes 90s and 117). He also was recycled to the Sopranos (and also made the cut to Boardwalk Empire).
VonMisesJr| 1.27.12 @ 8:55AM
1) Newt speaks incessantly about restoring the Constitution
2) He wishes to end unconstitutional departments such as Energy, Education and replace EPA
3) He talks of ending the duplication of services from multiple Agencies offering similar services
4) He talks about ending ObamaCare and not replacing it with a Romney version
5) He is serious obout closing the border and working toward a solution
MITT ROMNEY DOES NOT CONVINCE ME HE WILL DO ANY OF THESE THINGS. He wants to be POTUS and we should let him since he was a CEO?
POST American| 1.27.12 @ 10:00AM
---Some American Americans who were
there should REALLYT be calling out the
likes of Clint Eastwood for, not only delivering
demoralizing retreads etc. ----but BALKING
the 20th --30th --40th --50th and now 60th
Anniversary of the
------------------KOREAN WAR--------------------.
Seems Eastwood himself was a Korea era draftee
---who got out of going.
And, as we all know, ----others DID. . .
albert constantine jr| 1.27.12 @ 11:51AM
--------------though he later did win the MOH at Heartbreak Ridge-----------WAIT, that was Gunnery Sergeant Highway_______
Vlady| 1.27.12 @ 10:17AM
I simply won't vote for Romney. It's a bus that is going in the same direction as the Obama bus. Romney's bus is just slower. No thanks.
W| 1.27.12 @ 12:08PM
Vlady
I always enjoyed and agreed with your past comments but am surprised that you would not vote for Romney if he is the nominee against Obama.
Romney is not a life long movement conservative, but he has changed to pro life, and has stated he will cut taxes, repeal obamacare, drill for oil and gas, and reduce the deficit. There is no way that Obama even says he will do that and will not do that. On Supreme Court and federal judges they will appoiint differently.
Romney has changed, or flip flopped, but he has changed to the more conservative views. Whether is a politically expedient change is open to question, but as long as he does what he says, he is better than Obama. None of the four are perfect. Each has flaws.
We can't have four more years of Obama, Biden, Reid, etc. They must be defeated.
Al Adab| 1.27.12 @ 1:30PM
W:
One week to go for the decision, Giants/Patriots.
I remain curious how, given his religious affiliation, Romney ever could have accpeted as legitimate state funded abortion. His ability to compromise and justify (at leaast in his own mind) that issue leads me to question his commitment to the matters, such as Obie-care repeal which you cite.
It is clear that 2/3rds of GOP voters want someone else, yet his consistent pluralities could yet deliver the nomination. These candidates need to decide together who (maybe not even one of them) is best able to carry the ball across this goalline. That person should be our nominee.
Have a great weekend.
W| 1.27.12 @ 1:54PM
Al Adab
I also have doubts about Romney, but I am looking at it as what is the best we can do with these four candidates. You are right about the abortion issue. But it seems a lot of Christians and Jews have reconciled abortion with their religion.
There is not much difference between Newt, Santorum, and Romney in the positions they take in the debates. That is one reason they attack each other personally on who is the most credible candidate. I like Paul's domestic agenda to cut taxes and spending, but he seems oblivious to the terrorrists, and is always blaming the USA.
I am leaning towards the Giants because Eli Manning is on a hot streak, but Brady is very good.
Thank you, and have a great weekend. Am trying out an new Italian restaurant tomorrow night with my wife and another couple.
Skywalker L. | 1.27.12 @ 10:26AM
Ron Paul will save us! Ron Paul will save us!
R2D2
JimH| 1.27.12 @ 10:35AM
Obi Ron Paulobi
Al Adab| 1.27.12 @ 10:49AM
Try a platform along these lines:
1. End obamacare funding through executive order (2 can play that game).
2.Require DOD and Navy Dept to construct 6 new nuclear power plants as necessary for national defense.
3. Construct 6 new oil refineries under same order
4. Impound currently appropriated spending not yet allocated
5. Subm,it a balanced budget to replace continuing resolutions.
6. Immediate 10% employee reduction all executive agencies.
7. Immediate 10% budget reduction all executive agencies.
Does any candidate currently in the offing stand for anything? If not we better find one who does and fast.
Say Baptist| 1.27.12 @ 10:54AM
Anniversaries of wars for unclear reasons and outcomes: 60th of Korea. (Good thing North Korea was stopped) 200 of Napoleon's Russian campaign.(Good thing he had to retreat.) 200 anniversary of War of 1812. Good thing we didn't lose it.Post treat Victory at New Orleans vital.
Be that as it may. as MacArthur said;"THERE IS NO SUBSTITUTE FOR VICTORY!"
Dave | 1.27.12 @ 11:28AM
Let's see here: So, G. Tracy, III once served at the EPA? Tell you what G, you may want to delete THAT portion of your resume when posting at Spectator. It's kind of like listing time spent as a member of the Brown Shirts, but noting with the asterisk - *I only joined for the cool uniforms.
fmm| 1.27.12 @ 11:28AM
Santorum is the only choice if we are to actually make progress on the constitutional front, but he does not seem to be able to make headway. Gingrich has lots of potential and would be very effective if his handlers could reign in his outsized ego. Romney is pathetic and would be better suited to running in a democrat primary against Obama.
Dai Alanye | 1.27.12 @ 11:59AM
It's partly because of squishes like Meehan that Santorum makes less headway than he should, although the J'ville debate should change a few votes. Meehan's approach is like deciding to propose to the popular but bland girl rather than the exciting one who failed to be chosen Homecoming Queen. The process is called "settling for less than the best."
Occam's Tool| 1.27.12 @ 11:37AM
I am perfectly happy having a President who will take marching orders from Jim DeMint, Senate Majority leader 2013.
KennesawJack| 1.27.12 @ 11:00PM
Occam, if nothing else good comes from this election, your proposition will mean it's a Conservative victory.
OLDRAY| 1.27.12 @ 11:53AM
What a silly article. How many great leaders were businessmen ? I have nothing against businessmen. But they have nothing special that makes them qualified for leadership (except for business) I hear little about Romney's failure to disclose Swiss Bank income and (reportedly) income from 20 other investment (blind) funds. Just seems a bit sloppy for a great businessman. These items were required disclosure on forms reported last year.
George S| 1.27.12 @ 12:01PM
If the standard is now "[a capitalist] who garnered efficiencies, generated growth, multiplied jobs and created value for investors -- including pension funds", then that does indeed describe Mitt Romney.
It also describes George Soros and Warren Buffet. So what is your point?
Ron| 1.27.12 @ 12:43PM
Actually, a couple of corrections...
Generally speaking, the most immediate firepower was on the sides of a warship. However, the good captains would employ two "long toms" as stern chasers. What this meant is that you could chase an enemy while presenting the smaller profile (stern as opposed to sides, or flank.)
See the correlation...The smaller profile chasing and possibly sinking the larger adversary...and no, I do not mean Dr. Paul, btw...maybe Santorum.
Also, as a literary note, Patrick O' Brian's (born Richard Patrick Russ) originally wrote "Master And Commander" (1969) ("The Far Side Of The World" (1984) was a separate novel in the Aubrey-Mautrin series) to be set in the War Of 1812 era, and the unnamed frigate was one of America's great 6 (presumably, even though no name is given.) it was changed for the really good movie, due mainly to the UK casting and production components not wanting to anger the American viewing audience which is considerably larger than European audiences.
BTW, we need a LEADER of men (and women) not another suit or talking teleprompted puppet!!!!
PaulC| 1.27.12 @ 2:10PM
I'd rather lose with Gingrich than win with Romney, and I'll be voting accordingly, both in the primaries and in the general. If it's a choice between Romney and Obama in the general, I'll pass on that choice altogether.
Ed| 1.27.12 @ 3:25PM
Newt did have his Contract With America which was an important foil to President Clinton. In the past ten years however, his productive output has been limited to some interesting historical novels on Pearl Harbor and the Revolutionary War. He is an idea guy, not a public administrator. I am not a huge Romney fan, but at least he can run a government without FUBARing everything.
POST American| 1.27.12 @ 9:46PM
--------------------BOTTOM LINE-----------------------
"-----others did."
---------------AND over 5000 of those who
NEVER returned -----are STILL missing.
------------------THINK EUGENICS--------------------
-THINK the RED China-Globalist TREASON OP-
---------------------THINK FAST!-----------------------
Sonny119| 1.27.12 @ 10:18PM
G. Tracy Mehan, III, if you are going to attack Newt Gimgrich, as a Romney loyalist supporter, then just come out and say it, instead of hiding behind poetic literary points of comparison. Or don't you have the guts and the nerve to be so brave.
The liberal Republican RINO Party Establishment, have openly exposed themselves, and has thus openly declared themselves the most repulsive repugnant and vile Anti-Reagan Conservative RINO scum, in the history of the American politics and the Republican Party.
Their vile hostile attacks against Newt, with the most blatant lies and propagandist smears, all over the media outlets, via TV, newspaper print, internet, etc, that has ever been done to a politician, since Barry Goldwater in 1960 and 1964, then Ronald Reagan in both 1976, then 1980.. where they, the Rockefeller-Nixon-Ford-Bush Republican Party RINO elitist establishment, has a long history of hypocrisy and permanent political class entrenched arrogant elitism, about being an opposition political party to the liberal Democrats.
Let me give you some facts about Newt Gingrich, for which you so conveniently forgot and failed to mention..
By Peter Ferrara- 12.28.2011
"The Case for Newt"
Gingrich's Balanced Budget: Succeeding Where Bush Failed"
"Contrary to the untouched by reality liberal/left talking points about how the 1993 Clinton tax increases led to balanced budgets, when the Gingrich majority took power in 1995, it was greeted by the 1996 Clinton budget still projecting $200 billion annual budget deficits as far as the eye could see, totaling $2.7 trillion over 10 years, confirmed by CBO. The House passed a budget bill providing for $1 trillion in spending cuts over the next 10 years, and that was almost 20 years ago when $1 trillion was still real money.
In the government shutdown budget battles with Clinton, Gingrich won the substance, as Gingrich demonstrated the only way to balance the budget, with Reagan's supply-side economics. That involved both cutting taxes, to get the economy booming, and cutting spending, resulting in the longest period of federal surpluses since the 1920s.
This is what the official government records show. You can dig deep into the records at omb.gov yourself. Total federal discretionary spending, as well as the subcategory of non-defense discretionary spending, declined from 1995 to 1996 in actual nominal dollars. In constant dollars, adjusted for inflation, the decline was 5.4 percent. By 2000, total federal discretionary spending was still about the same as it was in 1995 in constant dollars. As a percent of GDP, federal discretionary spending was slashed by 17.5 percent in just four years, from 1995 to 1999.
Total federal spending relative to GDP declined from 1995 to 2000 by an astounding 12.5 percent, a reduction in the federal government relative to the economy of about one-eighth in just five short years. This was accomplished not just by reducing discretionary spending, but through fundamental structural reforms of some programs, such as the old AFDC entitlement program. The Gingrich Congress succeeded in block granting that program back to the states, after two vetoes from Clinton. After 10 years, the taxpayers saved 50 percent on the costs of that program, while the poor formerly on the program gained by going to work, with poverty among them plummeting. That is a model for future entitlement reform.
As a result, the $200 billion annual federal deficits, which had prevailed for over 15 years, were transformed into record-breaking surpluses by 1998, peaking at $236 billion by 2000. Over four years, the national debt held by the public was reduced by a record $560 billion in surpluses. When Gingrich left office, instead of CBO projections of $2.7 trillion in deficits over the next 10 years, CBO projected surpluses of $2.3 trillion over the next 10 years. That is a positive turnaround in the budget of $5 trillion. This is exactly what we need today. "
unquote-
These are the facts, and they are indisputable.
Newt accomplished this as Romnney was campaigning aginst Reagan Conservatism, and even publically denounced Reagan Conservatism, for his liberal progressive RINO agenda, while supporting othe like minded liberal politicians, as well as oimplementing his own liberal forced mandated inferior substandard State Socialized Medicine program, aka, Romneycare.
Since you, Mr Mehan II, like to use literay examples so much, here's a quote from William Shakespear- " To thine own self be true"
I suggest that you take heed to William Shakespear's words..
Dmitry Aleksandrovich| 1.28.12 @ 2:27AM
Snubbing Ron Paul by labeling him an amateur basically digs to the heart of the G.O.P.'s problem. The problem is that the G.O.P. stands for nothing. It has no real substance and nothing really to offer the majority of Americans (unless you are earning millions upon millions each year as an investor and paying less in taxes then your average Middle American worker who earns 35,000 a year or less). Ron Paul brings some real substance to the table (some real red meat) and is the only traditional conservative in these Republican Presidential debates. That's why Buchanan's people are overwhelmingly for Ron Paul and I don't think any of you would label Pat Buchanan as a LIBERAL or UNAMERICAN as you've tried to smear Paul. Santorum also brings some substance to the debates and I respect his convictions that he brings to the table because I think he truly believes in his Catholic faith and tries to reflect that in political stances he takes. However I could not support Santorum because his hawkish foreign policy (he advocates a pre-emptive strike on Iran and in meddling in Syria's internal conflict). That leaves me to vote for Ron Paul. Don't get me wrong Gingrich does bring a lot to the table and he is a very intelligent man, but the skelatons in that mans closet make Democratic strategists drool. Romney has no substance. He is the chameleon who changes his colors to best suit his environment...Romney changes his positions to best suit the constituency he's speaking to. The man has no back bone and he's way, way, way out of touch with the grievances of the average American. Romney would have a better shot at taking on Obama if he hadn't refuted his own version of Obamacare in Massachussetts. Then at least we would know that he's a man of conviction and principle that stands by his decisions. Unless we have a stockmarket crash between here and November Obama will eat Romney and or Gingrich for breakfast. Its not saying that Paul or Santorum could beat Obama, but their convictions definitely make them stand out from Obama and so far there's nothing I see in either of those men's past that would make them easy prey to Democratic attack adds. That's my two cents.
RON PAUL 2012
ER| 1.28.12 @ 10:46AM
Newt will lose "Republican rationale for governance"????!!??? And what is that? Increasing the size of the Federal Government LESS than the Democrats? No Child Left Behind? TARP IV? Amnesty for Illegal Aliens? Raising taxes NOT AS MUCH as the Democrats? Sorry, your canned analysis of the state of the Republican primaries missed one tiny point; Novemeber 2010 election which shows the Tea Party will have its say this cycle also, and its vote will go to the people most capable of stopping the Statist violators of the U.S. Constitution
Bumr50| 1.28.12 @ 1:56PM
Shut up, Bushie.
Your day in the sun is OVER.
POST American| 1.29.12 @ 11:04PM
--------------------BOTTOM LINE----------------------
"KOREA and NOT the long settled
World Wars, is rapidly emerging as
the definitive conflict of the 20th century
viz a viz the 21st--"
KOREA was betrayed so that the Globalist
RED China Halocaust 'experiment' was sealed
off from the world.
This as we take in the latest news leaks
that, in the midst of economic takedown
and massive, US taxpayer underwritten
industrial and economic transfer to
RED China -------even our Alaskan oil
stocks are being diverted from the
union and are being shipped, by Berskshire
'Hathaway' transit to the west coast for
X-port to ---RED China.
"Understand, the Globalists want to
SHUT DOWN AMERICA! ---they ARE
shutting down America. What could NOT
be accomplished even by staged wars
---has been accomplished via decades
of secret treaty-making by the 'shadow
government'."
WHERE are the voices for RETRO-active
impeachment of our past 4 CFR front op
administrations?
--------------THIS IS OPEN TREASON---------------
---Everything OLD is 'NEW-remburg' AGAIN!
---------------------------IT REALLY IS!
------------------------REALLY---------------------------
Interested Conservative| 1.29.12 @ 11:39PM
"Here's a test: of his countless ideas, schemes, programs and other pronouncements, name two of Newt Gingrich's top ideas which ring your bell."
OK - I'll play 1) Move the embassy to Jerusalem; 2) ask John Bolton to be Sec. of State.
Can you name two ideas of Mitt?