Wlady: You know I will do almost anything you ask, but you ask too much. If we required detainees at Gitmo to sit through "The Parent Trap" we'd clearly be violating the McCain Amendment. If penance I must do, please make it reasonable. Maybe a screening of "Funeral in Berlin" - a real snoozer - or even "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles" but not, I beg you, "The Parent Trap." As to Maureen - even in those days, the McClintock era - she was a lot more trouble than she was worth. Candice -- even in Murphy Brown -- was pretty and pretty amusing, despite what Dan Quayle said. And what, pray, is wrong with Valerie Bertinelli? Both she and Candice are vastly better actresses than Jamie Curtis, who inherited all her father's talent. I will always maintain that "The Black Shield of Falworth" ("yonda is my fadda's castle") is the worst movie ever.
The Spectacle Blog
Jed: First time I saw Miss O'Hara was in The Parent Trap, in which she played a Boston sophisticate who suddenly discovers the pleasures of hacienda life in Monterey, California. Brian Keith wins her back, or rather she devises a way to get him back, along with both of their twin girls (Hayley Mills) and a perfect American marriage family, and life. See the movie today and tell me she wasn't worth it.
Incidentally, don't think I didn't have my priorities straight yesterday -- didn't watch the Streisand movie until well after the Cowboys-Broncos game was over. After a bruising showdown like that, who needed more football? One can watch the highlights on ESPN only so many times.
Murphy Brown? Candice has to be the worst actress this side of Valerie Bertinelli.
Wlady: HBO? Ok, my apologies for accusing you of spending extra bucks on Barbra. Watching her on HBO is permissible, like drinking French wine someone else has purchased (my scruples go only so far.) But my other objections stand: why, when ESPN is now broadcasting in high-def, can you take time for Babs? Please tell me you won't do that again tonight. If you can't make that promise, let me know and I'll make an emergency delivery of "The Enforcer" or "Sudden Impact." As necessary, Harry Callahan and I stand ready to make your day. Or evening.
As to Mizz O'Hara, I lost all patience with her after "The Quiet Man." I remember "The Wind and the Lion", when Sean Connery (who ever cast a Scot as an Arab brigand?) repeatedly told Mrs. Pedicaris (the historically-inaccurate character played by Candice Bergen) that she was a "lot of trouble." Candice was worth it and Maureen wasn't.
Jed: When I predicted a rise in blood pressures, I didn't expect yours to be among them. But it may be calming to learn that I didn't shell out big bucks to see Streisand on the screen. The movie I mentioned was on HBO. Further, it didn't do to well at the box office -- precisely because Streisand's performance, along with Dustin Hoffman's as her husband, was savaged by the usually adoring liberal critics. Evidently they like their Streisand humorless and cold. My reaction, on the other hand, was thoroughly conservative: tolerant, appreciative of humanity, undogmatic.
By the way, I didn't know John Wayne was in those flicks with Maureen O'Hara. She sure was prettier than he was.
Wlady: I know you're very much a concerned and sensitive guy. But to pay one Yankee dollar (and I assume, based on empirical evidence of my own trips to see movies, that you paid quite a few) to see Barbra? C'mon pal. That's an anti-conservative act on several levels.
First, to pay for a ticket to a Streisand (or Fonda, or Baldwin, or so many others') movie is the ideological equivalent of donating, Turner-like, to the UN. Even one dollar in her pocket is too much. You gotta draw the line somewhere, pal.
Second, you're a busy guy. Among the deluge of offerings from the entertainment world, how can you possibly put Barbra in line -- even for ten minutes -- before NFL and college football? I'd agree that De Niro's presence is almost always worth the price of admission, but remember: Maureen O'Hara was enough to ruin several otherwise great flicks with the Duke.
Thanks to a cold snap and high winds, a whole new crop of leaves has descended onto my habitat. Rather than fighting the traffic at the malls, I'll be harvesting via trusty rake. No blowers allowed. This is supposed to be a quiet time of year.
Glad to see some traffic on this blog. Want to see its blood pressure rise? Here goes: I saw Barbra Streisand last night. She was wonderful. The movie was awful (Meet the Fockers), but cheesy and over the top enough to merit viewing. What stood out was that the Streisand persona was nothing like the uptight, humorless Democratic Stalinoid she's become.
Who'd have thunk it -- Streisandism with a human face!
Speaking of semantic insanity: the day they crucified Christ we call "Good Friday."
The day the retailers enrich themselves we call "Black Friday."
Though not classified, according to sources, this has been going on for a while. We're calling it "hot pursuit," and it apparently doesn't include independent, planned ops against known terrorist sites. Which, if you think about it, would include Bashar Assad's home and office. Just a suggestion, guys.
Debkafile was reporting yesterday that American forces had penetrated the Syrian border and were engaged directly with Syrian troops west of the city of al-Qaim. Al-Qaim is a border town on the Baghdad to Damascus highway, where very heavy fighting took place during the 2003 Iraq invasion between US forces and fleeing Saddam forces going to Syria.
As of 0820 today, Defense Department sources could not confirm and would not deny the truth of the Debkafile report. If it true, it is of enormous significance. We have tolerated terrorist sanctuaries in Syria for almost two years. We know where many are. The fact that we have not hit them yet (at least before yesterday) is a major failure in our prosecution of the war. Stay tuned.
Jonathan Chait wonders what poll respondants who describe themselves as "liberal" can mean by saying that Bush's Supreme Court picks are "too liberal." I can think of two reasons a liberal might think that.
One: A self-identified liberal might equate judicial liberalism with "judicial activism," and understand that term the way Cass Sunstein, Jeff Rosen and others have worked to tendentiously redefine it: to mean striking down laws and/or precedents (including when the Constitution requires doing just that). This is, of course, an example of one of liberals' many attempts to claim the mantle of "real conservative." (This phenomenom pops up a lot in fiscal policy debates. Just this week, Shawn Macomber noted Mark Warner casting his tax-hiking self as "the true definition of a conservative.")