Archive for the Movie Reference Category

First Annual Pushitzer Prize In Commentary For 2016 (April 18, 2016)

Posted in Awards / Incentives, Global Climate Change, Global Warming, Journalism, Movie Reference, O'Bama, Politics, Press/Media, Pulitzer, Pushitzer, Race on April 18, 2016 by e-commentary.org

. . .

          “The envelope please.  . . .  This year’s Pushitzer Prize in Commentary is awarded to . . . all the unnamed, unknown and unheralded commentators not working for the Herald who are pushing the envelope and pushing against the absurdity, insanity, dishonesty and hypocrisy that envelops us from every direction every day.  For distinguished commentary in a print or digital or any format.  For good and honest stuff.”

. . .

[Please send nominations for the Pushitzer Prize in Commentary for 2017 and a supporting letter by January 27, 2017 to e-ssay@gci.net and send the entry fee to your favorite charity.]

[See the e-commentary at “Pulitzers Are Pro-War?  Pressing The Pushitzers (April 22, 2013)” and last week’s e-commentary.]

Bumper stickers of the week:

For good and honest stuff

Will the public respond to Ken Burns, Jr.’s production of “Barack Obama” in 2046 the way the public responded to Ken Burns’ production of “Jackie Robinson” in 2016?  Mitch McConnell is today’s Ben Chapman.  (Senate Majority leader) Chapman wielded a baseball bat; (Coach) McConnell a gavel.  See the e-commentary at “‘I Hate Obama.’  The Trip Hammer Of Hate Tolls Without Toll And With Toll (March 10, 2014).”]

April 22:  “Happy Birthday Earth Day (April 23, 2012).”

To Raise Or Not To Raise? (December 14, 2015)  

Posted in Bureaucracy, Federal Reserve, Interest Rates, Movie Reference, Sports, Wall Street on December 14, 2015 by e-commentary.org

. . .

1          “That is the answer.”

2          “They can’t raise it, they can’t maintain it, they can’t lower it.  They are not in a stalemate because they are in checkmate.”

1          “Game over?”

. . .

2          “A decision not to decide is a decision.  The Fed has been deciding not to decide and has decided to destroy the real economy since at least 2008.  If they decide to raise the rate a nominal .125 or .250 percent, they may be able to get away with it.  Anything more substantial will tip over this unreal and surreal economy of their contriving.  Interest rate derivative swaps will strain, fragile emerging markets will sag and the federal government will be forced to spend more of the budget on interest payments.”

1          “They are said to need to show that they are tough guys and gals who are trying to return to a real economy.  They are said to need to establish ‘Wall Street cred’.”

2          “They have no ‘Main Street cred’.  At least among the few dozen folks who give a cred.”

. . .

1          “So will they raise the interest rate?  Yes or no?  If they do, how much?  .125?  .250?”

2          “The question is not ‘will’ they but ‘should’ they raise the interest rate.”

. . .

1          “A betting pool.  There you go.  We might as well have fun.”

2          “No they should not.  .125 to appear to be doing something.  The effective rate now may hover near an average of .100, so they may be able to do something without doing anything.”

1          “Maybe.  .250 to feign cred.  And then be able to reverse gears.”

2          “See we shall.”

. . .

[See the e-commentary at Interest Rates ‘risin (March 30, 2015).]

Bumper stickers of the week:

“Do.  Or do not do.  There is no try.”  Yoda

What happens when you run out of altitude, airspeed and ideas all at the same time?

Otter:  “I think this situation absolutely requires a really futile and stupid gesture be done on somebody’s part.”

Bluto:  “We’re just the guys to do it.”

                                                    “Animal House” movie (1978)

Fed up yet?

“In life, unlike chess, the game continues after checkmate.”  Isaac Asimov

Marital Musings (December 22, 2014)

Posted in Civil Rights/Civil Liberties, Constitution, Courts, Economics, Gold Standard, Kleptocracy, Movie Reference, Radio, Russia, Silver Standard, Society, Sports, Supreme Court on December 28, 2014 by e-commentary.org

. . .

H1        “So she said we had to set aside some time for a conversation.  I knew it would get bad.”

H2        “You don’t get to say anything.”

H1        “Except when spoken to.  So she said she had to confess that she was thinking about someone else while we were in medias res.  And she said that she was now happy to have gotten if off her chest.  I said that was fine.  She could be thinking about Mr. Magoo if it will get us through the night.  From my perspective, if I can handle the kitchen remodel, junior can get braces.  But it ended up not being fine.  I should have been upset.  She was upset that I was not upset.  I was beginning to get sort of upset that she was upset that I was not upset.”

H2        “Nothing about Gina Lollobrigida.”

H1        “She would have exercised the proviso ‘til death do us part’ and parted with me.”

. . .

H2        “She asked if I noticed that she had put on weight.  I had not noticed, so I told her that I had not noticed.  I am thinking that I get 100 points for candor and honesty and being a great guy and for being a little oblivious.  Maybe an MVP award and a hall pass.”

H1        “And she was upset that you were not upset.  And it was Katie bar the door with Katie showing you the door.”

H2        “I didn’t get a pass.  I told her that once she made the cut and was on the team, things like that did not really matter.”

H1        “And she parsed every phrase.”

H2        “‘Made the cut’ and ‘on the team’ are two separate concepts.  Saying that it is like two wrestlers who make weight and then each go off and have bacon cheeseburgers did not assuage her anxiety.”

. . .

H1        “We conversed with a counselor who opined about psychological affairs versus physical affairs and provided few insights to address our financial affairs.”

H2        “Do you think he was safe?”

H1        “She is sure that we only talk about sex.”

H2        “Safe by a mile.  Replay is clear.”

. . .

[See the latest sophistry from the Supreme Court that vitiates the Fourth Amendment.  http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/13-604_ec8f.pdf.  An illegal stop is an illegal stop and not a legal stop.]

[See the commentary at “Henrietta And Henry O, Two Young Lovers: The Contemporary Gift Of The Magi (December 27, 2010).”]

Bumper stickers of the week:

“Honey, would you rather I were making love to him using your name, or making love to you using his name?”  Annie Savoy, Bull Durham (1988)

Russian Exceptionalism > or = or < American Nationalism

The COMEX is instituting trading collars for the sale of gold and silver.  And the answer to Will Shortz’ “Sunday Puzzle” seeking the correct anagram for “Comex” is . . . “Fraud.”

Are Courts Irrelevant? Are Courts Illegitimate? (October 3, 2011)

Posted in Courts, First Monday In October, Law, Movie Reference, Pensions, Supreme Court on October 3, 2011 by e-commentary.org

. . .

a          “The Supremes open the doors today.”

b          “Didn’t His Excellency Chief Justice John G. Roberts close the doors to the Supreme Court years ago.”

a          “He did.  They will let themselves in to resume their part-time jobs receiving full-time pay and lifetime tenure via a side door, the service entrance if you will.”

b          “That is the gig of a lifetime.”

a          “The Supremes have not only closed the doors to the Court, they are closing the doors on the American dream.”

. . .  

a          “Hard to dispute that courts exist to incarcerate the underclass and to insulate the ruling class from responsibility.  That isn’t all bad, I guess.  Seems to depend on whether you have class.”

b          “Courts exist to give the pretence of the peaceful resolution of disputes and thereby to keep the masses from rioting.”

. . .

a          “Rating the characteristic judicial attributes is a close call.  Some days it is arrogance, other days it is anger.  It is always a close competition – anger, arrogance, arrogance, anger.” 

b          “I have endured many a nasty temper but few a calm judicial temperament.  Nothing will ruin a morning like appearing before a judge who is mired in a sterile marriage and fulminating over a fertile daughter.  He can use the bench as a bully pulpit for his undigested anger.”

a          “Or she for hers.”

b          “Or she for hers.  Some of these cats are as angry as a fer-de-lance with a hangnail.”

. . .

a          “Some days the judges sport a sourcaustic attitude, other days a condescending tone.  It is always a close competition – sourcaustic, condescension, sourcaustic, condescension.”

b          “I have collected court decisions in a file over the last few years.  The ‘Festschrift of Fear and Anger’ is in galley proofs.” 

. . .

a          “We equip police with batons and judges with gavels.  Both are used to beat.  There must be something in the fabric of the black moo-moo that transforms a person on the bench.”

b          “With increasingly few exceptions, judges are little more than tedious technicians and boorish bureaucrats reaching tendentious decisions.”

a          “Respect is an admixture of admiration and fear.  I don’t admire our judges; I do fear them.”

b          “They are not serving a useful function, yet they consume tremendous resources and waste a tremendous opportunity.  I have increasingly less use for them, yet they are drawing a regular paycheck and will draw a pension and do everything while on the bench to protect their paycheck and pension.”

 . . .

a          “The wrong lawyers are securing judgeships.  The wrong persons are obtaining political office.  Any attempt to reform the legal system must rely on the same raw material.  There is not much there.”

b          “Nothing like what I thought in law school.”

a          “What’s happened?”

. . .

[See the “e-ssay” titled “On Respect, Fear, Admiration and Irreverence (December 17, 2007)” and the “e-ssay” titled “Congress Should Increase Congressional and Judicial Pay; Shareholders Should Reduce CEO/CFO/COO Pay (March 5, 2007)” written at a time when the courts seemed to appear to offer the possibility of being part of the solution.]

Bumper stickers of the week:

Judge = FePb

Laws are not etched in stone today, they are concocted with an Etch A Sketch (R)

“. . . And Justice For All” movie with Al Pacino (1979) 

Officious B-crats. Made In The U.S.A. (June 6, 2011)

Posted in Bureaucracy, Courts, Movie Reference, Pensions, Pogo Plight, Society on June 6, 2011 by e-commentary.org

. . .

[0911 hours]

B          “You shall punch two holes at the top of the pleading.”

C          “What if you receive a pleading without two holes punched at the top of the pleading?”

B          “We reject it.”

C          “Even if it is a Motion For Stay Of Execution?”

B          “Don’t care if it’s not right.  Rules are rules.”

C          “I’m not talking about a stay of execution of a foreclose of a debt involving a fork lift, I’m talking about a stay of execution of a person.”

B          “Don’t care if it’s not right.  Rules are rules.  That is why they are rules.  Rules rule.  Two holes punched at the top of the pleading.”

. . .

[0937 hours]

C          “Do you know where the Recorder’s Office is located?”

B          “Do I look like a receptionist?  No, I don’t look like a receptionist.  I don’t look like a receptionist because I’m not a receptionist.  Do I really look like a receptionist?”

C          “You look like a person.  You look like a person receiving a pay chcck from the government.  You look like a person who might know which agencies are in the building.”

B          “Ask the receptionist.”

C          “Where do I find the receptionist?”

B          “There is no receptionist.  We don’t have a receptionist.  I don’t know where the Recorder’s Office is located.”

. . .

[0942 hours]

B          “We don’t record documents with two holes punched at the top of the pleading.  Period.”

C          “The court required two holes to be punched at the top of the pleading.”

B          “Don’t care if it’s not right.  There are rules.”

C          “I can’t remove the holes.  The statute says that every properly signed and notarized document ‘shall’ be recorded.  ‘Shall’ is a mandatory verb.  That wording actually makes life easier for all of us.”

B          “It’s discretionary around here.”

C          “Now today is a Tuesday.  On Tuesdays, some supervisors exercise discretion and record a document even if it has court-ordered holes in it.”

B          “Well, it is in fact Tuesday, we can make an exception this time and follow the statute, if you insist.”

. . .

[“Now the hired help is taking home regular paychecks.  I don’t.  The hired help has generous health care.  I don’t.  The hired help has been promised that they will receive a defined benefit retirement plan until they depart this planet.  I won’t.  The response of the ‘receptionist’ is not dictated by some absurd official policy.  And here on the wall near his office is a sign noting that the Recorder’s Office is down the hall to the left.  He may be a private sector contract employee who suspects that the contractor who may file bankruptcy to shed any financial obligations, yet he is receiving a regular paycheck.  Not far below the surface, Americans are angry, bitter, raging, frustrated and percolating.  Seems that some are working, although something is not working.”]

Bumper stickers of the week:

“Hold it [the chicken] between your knees.”  Jack Nicholson / Robert “Bobby” Eroica Dupea in “Five Easy Pieces” (1970) (With a little finesse, he could have gotten the toast without anyone getting toasted.)   

Tear, fold, spindle and mutilate