The Latest “News”

Here is what’s known so far:

On Monday, shortly before 3:00 pm, two bombs were detonated near the finish line of the Boston Marathon.

Another bomb was detonated shortly after at the JFK Library.

Twelve people were killed.

Three people were killed and more than a hundred injured.

Shortly before the bombing, a Facebook page went up expressing sympathy for the victims of the bombing.

Shortly before the bombing, an announcement was made at the finish line for everyone to remain calm.

A photo showed a distraught man hugging his dead girlfriend, who he had planned to propose to after the race.

One of the victims was an 8-year-old girl from Sandy Hook.

Boston cell phone service was shut down to prevent the accidental detonation of other bombs.

A Saudi national has been identified as the bomber and is under custody.

The New York Post has a photo of the two bombers on its cover this morning.

This is clearly the work of Middle Eastern terrorists.

This is clearly the work of American right-wing extremists.

The bombing shows a high level of sophistication.

Anyone can create a pressure-cooker bomb; the instructions are available on the Web.

Clearly our intelligence community is failing us because it failed to pick up any chatter about this latest plot.

The FBI has identified a suspect and made an arrest. 

The FBI released photos of two men and asked for the public’s help in identifying them.

The photos clearly show olive-skinned Arab men.

The photos clearly show white Americans. 

The suspects were identified as local residents of Chechen descent whose family came to America in 2002. Shortly after robbing a 7/11, the suspects apparently shot a campus security officer at MIT, then carjacked a Mercedes SUV, by which they were tracked to Watertown, MA. During a shootout, one of the suspects was killed while the other one escaped.

One of the suspects has been identified as a Brown student missing since the middle of March.

One of the suspects, stripped naked, was arrested by police.

The younger suspect’s social media accounts show a mellow kid unlikely to become a terrorist.

The younger suspect’s social media accounts show a devotion to Islamic extremism. 

We will provide more misinformation as it becomes available.

Posted in crime | Tagged , | 2 Comments

By the Book

(The New York Times Sunday Book Review prints a weekly column, “By the Book,” in which an author answers generic questions about his or her reading habits. I decided to take a crack at some of the most common questions.  Since everyone loves to talk about books, feel free to write your own version.)

What was the best book you read recently?

I devoured Gillian Flynn’s Gone Girl. Hardly a chapter went by that didn’t make me say, “Ooh, that’s devious.” It’s not just a great crime story; it’s a great dissection of how cracks in a normal marriage can become craters. The scary part is that I recognized a lot of myself in her male protagonist, Nick.  Seeing how his words and actions made him look like, if not a criminal, at least an asshole, made me realize that if my wife suddenly disappeared, some of my online communication would require me to hire an attorney.

What book is on your night stand now? 

Since I’m the earliest stages of attempting a comic novel, I’ve been reading comic novels as inspiration.  I just finished A Confederacy of Dunces and I’ve just begun Terry Southern’s The Magic Christian.  I’m also reading Lost at Sea, a collection of essays by Jon Ronson.

When and where do you like to read?

I usually read in bed.  However, my wife bought a chaise lounge right before Christmas – very much against my will – and I’ve since discovered it’s a very comfortable place to read. (He said sheepishly.)  I also like to sit with a book in a coffee house just for the change of atmosphere.

Who are your favorite authors?

I’m mostly a nonfiction reader, so I choose books by subjects more than authors.  There are very few writers that I own more than two books by. Many of my youthful enthusiasms – Hesse, Salinger, Pynchon (hated his last book) – have evaporated. That said, I’ll read anything by Bill Bryson or Elmore Leonard and among the newer fiction writers, I’ve liked what I’ve read by Jhumpa Lahiri, Junot Diaz and Joshua Ferris.

What’s your preferred literary genre? Any guilty pleasures?

I have a fondness for true crime stories; I just re-read Capote’s In Cold Blood for the first time in 40 years.  Not because I’m fascinated with lurid crimes (though sometimes I am), but because I’m horrified by how untrustworthy our criminal justice system is.  Some examples I recommend are Mara Leveritt’s Devil’s Knot, about the West Memphis 3, Robert Mayer’s The Dreams of Ada, about two Oklahoma men who have been in prison for almost 30 years after being tricked into “confessing” to a crime they almost certainly didn’t commit, and Clive Stafford Smith’s The Injustice System, which is not just about an innocent client that he personally represented but is also a detailed analysis of how the justice system is almost designed to create injustice.  I have a vague ambition to write a true crime book myself, but that would require two things to which I am allergic: research and interviews.

If you could require the president to read one book, what would it be?

Some joker wrote a book called Send In the Clown Car; I think the President might enjoy the parodies of some of his political opponents and invite the author to work on his press releases. Oh wait, one of the pieces makes fun of the President, which would probably trigger a tax audit, so never mind.

Paper or electronic? 

I was really excited when I got my Kindle two years ago, but I’ve drifted back to primarily paper.  I just love holding a book in my hands and I love how my traveling bookmark charts my progress from beginning to end.  Still, I like the portability of an e-reader because I can use it sitting on a train or in a mall while my family shops.  I read a review of George Saunders’ Tenth of December and five minutes later, I was reading it on my Kindle; you can’t get more convenient than that. By the way, I don’t know if I’d agree with the Times’ quote that Saunders’ book may be the best you’ll read all year, but if I wrote a story as good as his “Escape From Spiderhead,” I’d send a copy to everyone who’d ever said a bad word about me and say, “How you like me now, be-yotch?”

What’s the funniest book you’ve ever read?

Bryson’s A Walk in the Woods.  It actually inspired me to spend a couple of hours walking the Appalachian Trail. And when I say “walking the Appalachian Trail,” I don’t mean the Mark Sanford definition. Though that would have been a more fruitful way to spend two hours.

What were your favorite books as a child? Is there one book you wish all children would read?

When I was a kid, I read all of the Hardy Boys, just as my daughters read all of the Nancy Drew stories.  With younger children, you can’t go wrong with Seuss, and I’m glad I got to share the Harry Potter series with my daughters.  I’m leery of forcing the canon on kids too early; I suspect a lot of nascent reading habits were crushed by premature exposure to Macbeth and Silas Marner. However, I think Anne Frank’s diary and Fahrenheit 451 are good recommendations for adolescents.

What book had the greatest impact on you? What book made you want to write?

My answer will be the opposite of most people’s.  It’s the crappy books that make me want to write because I think, “Wow, you got that piece of shit published?  I can do better than that.”  Great books make me think, “Oh crap, I could never do that.”  Then I want to put my keyboard in storage and go play a nice, stress-free game of tiddlywinks.

Disappointing, overrated, just not good: what was the last book you hated? Do you remember the last book you put down without finishing?

One reason I read more nonfiction is that I have a low tolerance for pretentiousness; I find that if a nonfiction writer is a pompous ass, I can still learn something, but a pompous fiction writer makes me want to toss a book into a fireplace. I have no trouble discontinuing if I’m bored, as I did recently with Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness.  I recently read Philipp Meyer’s American Rust, about a small Pennsylvania town that’s been ravaged by the disappearance of its manufacturing base, a subject that interests me.  But I thought the writing ponderous, the plot moved at a glacial pace, the story felt contrived rather than organic, and I almost stopped many times.  If you applied Elmore Leonard’s dictum that “If it feels like writing, rewrite it,” you’d rewrite 95% of Meyer’s novel.  Also, just the mention of Beowulf gives me hives.

Are you a re-reader? What books in particular do you find yourself returning to, and why?

Although I just re-read Capote and A Confederacy of Dunces, I rarely read a book a second time. My days are numbered and I’d rather spend that time exploring something new than rehashing something old.  That said, I read Albert Camus’ The Plague every decade or so, and it’s about that time. 

You can bring three books to a desert island. Which do you choose?

Let’s see: 1) Charles Pierce’s Idiot America, to remind me that I don’t miss civilization; 2) Playboy: The Complete Centerfolds, because I’ll be lonely and may need to, um, amuse myself; 3) A hardcover, large print, unabridged copy of Edward Gibbon’s Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, because eating its 2,000+ pages would provide sustenance (can I bring ketchup?), or I could use the book as a life raft.

What do you plan to read next?

In my mind, I’ve chosen the new Tana French novel and the Neil Young memoir as my next books, but as I sit here with my bookcase within arm’s reach, two books are whispering to me: Katherine Boo’s Behind the Beautiful Forevers, which everyone says is great, and (I’m being serious) Anna Karenina.  One of my few New Year’s Resolutions was to read some of the classics that I’ve never tackled, and Tolstoy seems like a good place to start. (And hopefully not to end.)

Posted in books | Tagged , | 1 Comment

Visiting Ayn Rand World, the Libertarian Theme Park

I met Sandra at a Ron Paul rally and it was love at first sight. When she and I finally took the plunge, we knew exactly where we wanted to go on our honeymoon: Ayn Rand World, the new libertarian theme park.

The day after our nuptials, we landed at Milton Friedman International Airport, picked up our bags without any fascistic TSA agent handling our family jewels, inhaled the intoxicating air of personal freedom and headed over to the car rental counter.

“Yes, sir,” said the agent, “here are the keys to your Ford Explorer.”

“Ford Explorer?” I asked.  “I wanted something with better gas mileage.  Don’t you have a hybrid?”

“Hybrid?” she chuckled.  “Oh, sir, we don’t offer those big government-backed creations.  We only offer vehicles that the free market supports.”

Reluctantly, we drove our SUV to the hotel and checked into our room at the Fountainhead, a magnificent piece of architecture where we enjoyed our freedom from government-mandated low-flow toilets and shower heads. Our room rate was $10 less than a similar room outside the park, since it didn’t include an expensive sprinkler system. As I expected, the desk drawer contained a copy of not the Gideon Bible, but The Fountainhead.

The next morning, we drove to the park, giddy with anticipation. As we arrived at the turnstiles, just past the animatronic Ayn Rand at the entrance, I was startled by the appearance of the man in front of me and pointed him out to a park guide.

“Oh, yes, sir,” he answered. “Here in Ayn Rand World, we believe the right to bear arms is one of our most sacred rights and shall not be infringed.”

“Yes, I understand,” I replied, “but he’s carrying a bazooka!”

We began our visit by racing over to the park’s most popular ride, Deregulation Mountain.  The top of the ride progressed slowly and carefully, as the “regulations” forced us through a narrow pass at a modest speed and an unchallenging grade. However, as the “regulations” loosened up, we went careening down the hill at an ever increasing speed, down an ever more severe grade, until it felt like the ride was out of control.  When we finally arrived safely at the bottom, our hearts were in our mouths but we had a better understanding of how deregulation would electrify the free market.

Next, we headed over to the casino to play a round of Health Care Roulette, an exciting card game where the player tries to match the best combination of good health and sufficient insurance coverage. Because Sandra and I didn’t bring much money for gambling, we ended up with “Chemotherapy” and “No Coverage,” one of the worst possible combinations.  Fortunately it was only a game of chance!

We skipped the children’s section – if I have to hear that annoying song, “It’s a Small Government After All,” one more time I’ll scream! Soon we arrived in the most popular section of the park, Second Amendment Land. We knew we wouldn’t have time to take the shuttle over to the Hunting Range, which is well stocked with game, but we fully intended to spend time at the shooting gallery.

One of the exciting things about Second Amendment Land is that, upon entrance, every visitor is given a pistol – filled with blanks, of course!  Random tourists are confronted unexpectedly by park employees disguised as muggers and you get to test your skills at self-defense.

Sure enough, after a few minutes, a guy tapped my shoulder and said, “Hey, buddy.”

I pulled my gun from my holster, swung around and aimed it at the forehead of a nerdy guy with an overbite and thick Coke-bottle eyeglasses.

“Whoa, whoa,” said the nerdy guy. “Calm down!  I just wanted to tell you that you dropped your cell phone.”

“Oh, I-I’m sorry,” I stammered, picking my phone up from the ground.  “Thanks a lot. Sorry for almost shooting you.”

“That’s OK,” he replied. “But a word of advice: turn off your phone.  It’s useless here.”

“It is?” I said with surprise. “Why?”

“Because the Feds can track your movements by your cell phone.  That’s why there is no cell tower anywhere near Ayn Rand World.  They won’t build one until all phones are untraceable.”

Sure enough, I looked at my phone and it read, “No signal.”  I thanked him and shut it off.

As Sandra and I strolled hand-in-hand to the next section of the park, we were startled by a gunshot.

“What was that?” I asked a park staffer as I dove to the ground.

“You must be a first-timer here,” she giggled. “That’s our pest control technician. He’s always shooting at the pigeons who try to poop on the Ron Paul statue.”

The excitement in Second Amendment Land reminded me of the growling in my tummy. “Are you up for lunch, Sandra?”

“Sure am!”

We walked into the first restaurant we saw but were startled by the sight of a rat running along the wall.

“Ew!” I declared. “Why hasn’t the health inspector shut this place down?”

“Ha!” sneered the maitre d’.  “No health inspector is allowed in here. We allow the free market to decide what is healthy and what isn’t.”

“Well, this free marketer is taking his business elsewhere,” I snorted, and we returned to the sidewalk.  Soon we arrived at Chez Roark, a bright and clean-looking establishment which defined its cuisine as “laissez fare.”  We were led to a table near the window and handed our menus.

“Sea turtle soup is on the menu?” I asked the waiter. “Isn’t that an endangered species?”

“Sir,” he replied, “the only endangered species in 21st century America is the free man.”

Sandra ordered the chicken salad a la Rand Paul (“all white meat topped with a little nuts”), while I stuck with the John Galt all-you-can-eat shrimp.  It was so filling that I was afraid I would have to unbuckle my belt.  We paid our bill and rejoined the strolling tourists.

We took a brief break to use the restrooms.  Usually, stopping to take a leak is merely functional, but I admit to getting real pleasure from pissing on a urinal cake that read “IRS.”

As we approached the Business District, the air was filled with an acrid black smoke.

“What is that horrible stench?” complained Sandra.

“That’s from the smokestack over at the manufacturing plant,” answered a smiling park guide.

“Why don’t they clean it up?” I asked, holding my nose.

“I like the smell of coal burning in the morning,” he replied. “It smells like … industry.  It smells like the Federal government not butting in, spending our tax money and stifling business.”

We turned our heads to the right, hoping to avoid the odor, only to see an embarrassing eyesore: tents, tin huts and broken-down cabins, surrounded by people in ragged clothes.

“What the heck is that?” I asked.

“That’s Shantytown,” replied the guide. “Unfortunately with laissez-faire capitalism, there are not just winners but also losers.  Since we no longer tax the winners’ hard-earned wages to provide a safety net, these people have to fend for themselves.”

“Can’t you provide them jobs?”

“A lot of them do work at the manufacturing plant.  But since we have been freed from having to provide a minimum wage, some of them don’t earn enough to pay for proper housing or three square meals a day.”

“But that’s terrible!” I cried.

“Oh, they’re fine,” responded the guide. “Fortunately, they are all within walking distance of Charityville.”

We also experienced a few unpleasant moments on the States’ Rights Midway, which is divided into fifty sections, each with its own set of rules. As we walked from “Indiana” to “Kentucky,” my feet were not expecting the sudden change from a cobblestone surface to flat, slick cement and I tripped and fell face first, skinning my knee and elbow.

Moments later, as we entered “Mississippi,” I witnessed a security guard harassing a couple for a public display of affection and chasing them out of the state. I couldn’t hear if the objection was because they were interracial or homosexual.

“I thought libertarians were for personal freedom!” I said angrily to the security guard, pointing a finger in his face.

“We are,” he replied. “But our bigger objection is to the federal government’s interference with the state’s right to discriminate.”

I realized that the harassed visitor was the only non-white face I’d seen in the park. I approached him and asked him if he had noticed it too.

“Oh, yes,” he answered. “My black relatives and friends are all dismissive of the libertarians. They insist that if the libertarians had been in charge of the government, we never would have gotten civil rights legislation passed.  States would still be allowed to discriminate in education, housing and employment.  Children born into poor families would be at an even greater disadvantage than they are now.”

“But you don’t think so?” I asked.

“Hell, I don’t care,” he said. “I’m rich!”

We took in a few minutes of the daily Main Street Parade.  Several of the floats were spectacular, especially the Free Will Diorama, but the one dedicated to Objectivism seemed a little ponderous.  I’d prefer a lighter touch.

One of the most popular rides in the park is the Federal Budget Roller Coaster.  Each rider is given a sword and as you swoop down and around different displays representing part of the massive Federal budget, you are encouraged to “slash the government.”  The rider who slashes the most is given a prize.  The challenge is that your opportunity to slash each section is brief, and the coaster moves so rapidly that your slashes can end up being indiscriminate.

As we rolled past a series of wall “cabinets,” I knocked down the one marked “Education,” but I also unintentionally demolished the one marked “Defense.” (My bad.) In her haste to slash “Social Programs,” Sandra inadvertently decapitated the animatronic “Poor Person.”  I was also frustrated by my inability to slash “Foreign Aid;” it turned out to be a smaller target than I had hoped.  Needless to say, I didn’t win.  I’ll have to work on my ninja skills for my next visit.

We bypassed the Legalize Drugs section; pot smoking triggers Sandra’s asthma.  The crowd there was the largest in the park – a lot of them seemed to be blitzed – and we realized the Rand World creators were wise to put it near the exit.  If visitors came here first, they’d never circulate to enjoy the rest of the park’s offerings.  I did enjoy one slacker’s T-shirt which read, “A libertarian is a conservative who smokes pot.”

Finally, we reached the last – but certainly not least – section of the park when we entered the Nanny-Free State, where visitors can ignore the nagging of the do-gooders and the health Nazis.  Sandra and I rode motorcycles without helmets on Gary Busey Avenue, and it was exhilarating to feel the wind against our faces, though it also made the rest of the afternoon a “bad hair day” for Sandra.  Park employees perform the roles of nags, and visitors are encouraged to retaliate.  Sandra gleefully shoved a bacon cheeseburger down a vegan’s throat, while I forced the “Surgeon-General” to smoke an unfiltered cigarette.

On our way out, we stopped in the Ayn Rand World gift shop, which offered an impressive array of tchotchkes.  We bought a pop-up book of Atlas Shrugged, so we can indoctrinate our future children on the importance of thinking for oneself, and a bumper sticker that read, “Sex With a Libertarian is the Gold Standard.”  Which reminds me: their gift shop is the only place I’ve seen that allows you to pay not just with cash or credit, but with gold.

Sandra and I drove back to our hotel, exhausted but also informed and empowered.  We’ll need a good night’s sleep tonight because tomorrow we will fly back to the real world and I’ll return to my job at the bank.  After all, those houses aren’t going to foreclose themselves!

(From my book, “Send In the Clown Car”)


Posted in economy, politics | Tagged , | 1 Comment

A Grim Fairy Tale

Once upon a time, in the Greatest Kingdom on Earth, a boy was born.  He was not a king, nor was he a prince.  In fact, he was just an ordinary Joe. But he grew up to be a smart, kind, hard-working man.

Around the same time, a girl was born.  She was not a queen, nor was she a princess.  In fact, she was just an ordinary Jane. But she also grew up to be a smart, kind, hard-working woman.

The young man and the young woman met, fell in love, and were soon married to the rejoicing of their friends.  They found good jobs with solid companies, bought a comfortable home and raised a son who grew up to be a smart, kind, hard-working adult.

The man and woman were good citizens of the Kingdom.  They voted, paid their taxes, supported charitable causes, obeyed the law, and were considerate of their neighbors.  They lived modestly, saved for their son’s college tuition and saved for their retirement. They knew others weren’t as fortunate and offered help to those in need.  Still, life was good and they were thankful to be living in the Greatest Kingdom on Earth.

But one day, as they grew older and neared retirement age, things changed.  The woman’s company merged with another company.  Her boss explained to her that the merged company was doing something called “downsizing.”  The woman did not understand this word, and the boss explained that it translated to “you no longer have a job.” After the woman left his office, the boss called to hire a personal chef.

The woman was saddened and worried about the future, but she felt safer knowing that the man still had a good job with a solid company.  One day, however, the man’s company decided that his salary and benefits were too steep, so his job was sent to a kingdom far, far away, where people would do the work for much less money. His boss explained to him that the company was doing something called “outsourcing.”  The man did not understand this word, and the boss explained that it translated to “you no longer have a job.” After the man left his office, the boss called to buy a new yacht.

The man and woman were upset, but they went about the task of finding new jobs. However, they found that the economy was bad and that available jobs were scarce. Still, they spent a few hours each day looking at job listings. When they found ones that seemed to match their skills, they filled out applications and forwarded resumes. But after several months, they had not been offered even a single interview; nothing, nada, bupkes. They suspected that, since the companies were shedding employees who were old, they were not going to turn around and hire people who were old.

They decided to lower their sights and aim at jobs for which their professional experience and education were not necessary.  On the few occasions when they were granted an interview, they dressed nicely, smiled and acted enthusiastic, and tried to impress upon the interviewer that they were smart, kind, hard-working adults.  But they were told that they were “overqualified.” They didn’t understand this term, so the interviewer explained that it translated to “you don’t get this job.”  The result was nothing, nada, bupkes.

The man and woman looked around and saw that many of their aging friends were in the same situation, discarded by the Kingdom and no longer valued. They saw that some of their friends had developed health problems but could no longer afford medical treatment. They saw that some of their friends had lost their homes and used up their savings.  The man and the woman realized that this might eventually become their fate too.  They saw that, even though so many were out of work, the stock market was rising rapidly and the Kingdom’s rich inhabitants were getting even richer.

The man and woman became very sad and that sadness turned to bitterness.  In fact, their sadness was so profound that, some mornings, they found no reason to get out of bed.

One day, the man pondered their situation and said to the woman, “Yea, verily, my sweet, we hath been deceived. We hath done everything expected of us, all for naught. The people who dubbed this the Greatest Kingdom on Earth doth feed us a steaming pile of bullshit. A truly great Kingdom would not let the lives of so many mature inhabitants goeth to hell in a handcart, but the rulers of the Kingdom, and its wealthiest inhabitants, doth not give a flying fuck about us.  They think we are no longer fit to wipe a rich man’s asshole.”

The woman replied, “True dat, my love. I hath had the same thoughts and reached the same inescapable conclusion. ‘Tis not just the old. Our son hath graduated from college, but the best job he could get art making overpriced coffee for smug, self-involved turds. But he is young and hath time, while we doth not. It fills my heart with anger.”

The man said, “Lo, my dear, my anger art so deep that I doth wish to get my hands on one of those greedy cocksuckers and wring his neck until the life doth disappear from his eyes.”

The woman answered, “No, my darling, while I wish a pox upon their houses, violence doth not become you.  Indeed, it wouldst be futile because the Kingdom would just findeth another greedy cocksucker to replace him. All we can do is goeth forward and believe that, as the troubadour Sir Robert Marley singeth, ‘Every little thing is gonna be alright.’”

And thus the man and woman clasped hands, declared their enduring love for each other and for their son, and vowed to keep trying.

But, because life ain’t a goddamn fairy tale, nobody lived happily ever after.  Except for the rich.

The End

Posted in economy, personal | Tagged | 2 Comments

Wayne LaPierre Reviews the Oscar Nominees

For the last few years, I’ve attended an annual movie marathon in which they presented all of the Oscar nominees for Best Picture.  Since I couldn’t make it this year, I asked my good friend Wayne LaPierre to attend in my stead.  I know you have heard Wayne’s harsh criticisms of Hollywood culture but he’s concerned that his image seems a bit shrill, so he welcomed this opportunity to soften it.  As his French surname would indicate, Monsieur LaPierre is in fact quite the discerning cineaste. (By the way, Wayne is embarrassed by his French roots, so I always address him by the English translation of his last name, “The Peter,” which never fails to tick him off.)

Anyway, I appreciate that Wayne took time out of his busy schedule to see all nine nominated films.  Here are his reviews: 

Amour: This French film about octogenarian love tested by hardship is quite moving; I hope the NRA board is as compassionate when I’m ready for the great hunting lodge in the sky. However, Michael Haneke’s script and direction inadvertently reveal the major problem with Western European countries today: draconian firearms laws. Senior citizens like Emmanuelle Riva’s Anne must be armed to defend themselves against the dangers of aging, such as attacks of dementia. 

Les Misérables: Here is one of our nightmare scenarios in a nutshell (well, an interminable 2 ½ hour nutshell): when the public is unarmed, the government has all of the power and they will chase your defenseless ass through the sewers. A poignant film, to be sure, but when Russell Crowe started singing – talk about an assault weapon!  I suspect even Sarah Brady felt the urge to reach for a Bushmaster AR-15. 

Beasts of the Southern Wild: This film can be classified as fantasy because of the fairy tale creatures faced by the young girl Hushpuppy.  I call it fantasy because it is filmed in Louisiana, a place where men wipe their asses with a gun barrel, yet there is no gun violence.  In a realistic film, the “Aurochs” would never be a danger – a few good old boys armed with rifles would solve the problem ASAP. 

Life of Pi: I dreaded seeing this movie just because of its title – who the hell wants to see a movie about a mathematical concept?  Turns out, however, that Pi is a boy.  Ang Lee’s sensitive film is about Pi’s journey with wild animals and how faith saves him. The cinematography is beautiful and the film definitely merits the NRA seal of approval.  The animals, especially the Bengal tiger, are beautiful and will tempt members to snatch their hunting rifles, which is why I recommend that they do NOT watch it in 3-D.

Argo: Here’s another Hollywood incitement to violence: check out the fashions and hairstyles in this film! (Two words: justifiable homicide.)  Set in 1979 during the Iranian hostage crisis, the movie (through sheer negligence) demonstrates the importance of self-defense.  If, instead of cutting and running, the Americans in the Embassy had grabbed some AK-47s and started spraying lead, things would have been much different. Not in this movie, of course, but what do you expect from a liberal Democratic weenie like director Ben Affleck?

Django Unchained: Finally, someone gets it! Thank you, Quentin Tarantino, for recognizing that if slaves had been armed, the issue that divided this great country would have been resolved decades earlier.  And how different American history would have been – no Civil War, no Jim Crow, maybe no Black Panthers that scared my hero Ronald Reagan into endorsing gun control when he was Governor.  It is imperative that we correct the history books and stop blaming the evils of slavery on the Southern plantation owners and start placing the blame where it belongs – on the Federal gun grabbers. 

Lincoln: Steven Spielberg should have talked to Tarantino about how arming the oppressed would have sped up justice.  But of course, Mr. Spielberg also left that critical detail out of Schindler’s List. Lincoln is supposed to be an accurate depiction of the enactment of the 13th Amendment but come on: it doesn’t show a single gun lobbyist in the halls of Congress, so how accurate can it be? I will grant that Daniel Day-Lewis feels astonishingly authentic as the 16th President, and that Sally Field and Tommy Lee Jones earned their nominations. It’s telling, however, that Spielberg doesn’t depict the assassination, so he wouldn’t have to address the obvious truth that Honest Abe could have defended himself against John Wilkes Booth if either he or Mrs. Lincoln had been carrying a concealed weapon – oh, and a rear view mirror. 

Zero Dark Thirty: And here it is, our ultimate nightmare: you’re sitting in your family compound, maybe watching porn and minding your own business – hell, you’re not even on the grid – when the next thing you know, jack-booted government thugs are breaking down your door.  Even worse, they will take years meticulously planning to disarm you.  And you thought survivalists were delusional?  I suspect Kathryn Bigelow has been reading the NRA’s press releases because it feels like a story we could have written ourselves. I recommend that all NRA members see it and absorb it as a warning to be prepared for the day when the tree of liberty must again be refreshed with the blood of patriots.

Silver Linings Playbook: Finally, there is this complicated but charming love story.  Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence give excellent performances, and I bow to no man in my admiration for Robert DeNiro (Taxi Driver? Be still, my heart!)  However, while watching this film, I came to an uncomfortable conclusion that might surprise you: that bipolar Philadelphia Eagles fans should not be allowed to buy guns. That is just too combustible a combination.  Even I have to draw the line somewhere.

Bottom line: very few of the Oscar nominees show any love for the Second Amendment, but what did you expect from the liberals in La-La-Land?  However, there are current films that do.  Normally, I would tout the new Sylvester Stallone film, Bullet to the Head.  However, I was disappointed to read an interview in which he endorsed an assault weapons ban; I always suspected that, deep down, Stallone was a Second Amendment pussy.

Therefore, I’m urging all Americans to go out this weekend and see the new Bruce Willis flick, A Good Day to Die Hard.  Willis is a Second Amendment absolutist, God bless him – in an interview, he said, “I think that you can’t start to pick apart anything out of the Bill of Rights without thinking that it’s all going to become undone” – and his new movie backs up our contention that the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.  I vow that as long as I am the head of the NRA, every day in America will be a good day to die hard.

Posted in Movies, politics | Tagged , | 1 Comment

Is Texas Executing an Innocent Man?

On January 2, 1999, hunters in Sam Houston National Forest in Texas discovered the body of Melissa Trotter, a 19-year-old Lone Star College student who had been missing since December 8.  She appeared to have been strangled with one leg of pantyhose.

Investigators had already settled on Larry Swearingen as her killer. Swearingen had a police record and was, in fact, arrested three days after her disappearance on outstanding traffic warrants, and was still in jail the day Melissa’s body was discovered.  He was acquainted with the victim; she had canceled a lunch date with him the day before her disappearance.  Two witnesses ID’d him in a police line-up, claiming that they saw him sitting with her in the college library that day.  Fibers from her jacket were found in the front seat of his truck; police theorized that Swearingen abducted her, and that when she refused his sexual advances, he assaulted and killed her before dumping the body in the park.

There was some damning evidence. Although neither Swearingen nor his wife smoked, a pack of Marlboro cigarettes – Melissa’s brand – and a cigarette lighter were found in his home.  A few days after Melissa’s body was found, Swearingen’s landlord discovered half of a pantyhose in a dumpster near the accused’s trailer. Even worse, while in jail Swearingen wrote a fake letter purporting to be from the true killer.

It is no surprise that a Texas jury convicted Swearingen of Melissa Trotter’s murder.  After three stays of execution, Swearingen is now scheduled to get a lethal injection on February 27. However, many people have proclaimed Swearingen’s innocence and the Innocence Project has taken up his case.  Nine forensic pathologists and entomologists have declared that Swearingen could not have committed the crime.  Furthermore, when you examine the seemingly convincing circumstantial evidence closely, it does not stand up to scrutiny.

Two witnesses testified that Swearingen sat with Melissa in the school library between 11:30 am and 1:30 pm on December 8. However, his cell phone records show he was not on campus during that time frame, part of which was spent getting his car repaired.  In addition, a professor testified that Melissa attended his review class during that time.  The witnesses describe a blond-haired man; Swearingen’s hair is black.  The police lineup was rigged; Swearingen was wearing prison garb while the others in the lineup were not.  Even so, one of the witnesses could not identify Swearingen in the courtroom and had to be coached on the stand by the prosecutor. (Swearingen admits seeing Melissa Trotter briefly in the college library shortly after 1:30 on December 8, but insists he did not speak to her.)

A pack of Marlboro cigarettes, Melissa Trotter’s brand, was found in Swearingen’s home.  Under questioning, however, Swearingen’s wife admitted that she was a secret smoker, a habit she was hiding from her husband, and that her brand was Marlboro. DNA tests on the cigarettes and the lighter excluded Melissa Trotter.

The landlord’s discovery of the pantyhose seems fishy. Investigators had previously searched Swearingen’s trailer thoroughly twice and found nothing.  It has all the earmarks of planted evidence, either by the cops or someone looking to frame Swearingen. Evidence that the two halves are part of the same pair of pantyhose is flimsy.

However, what really makes the case against Larry Swearingen look weak is the forensic evidence: it’s all exculpatory. Blood was found under Melissa Trotter’s fingernails, perhaps the sign of a defensive struggle.  DNA tests showed that the blood belonged to a male, but excluded Swearingen.  Nor did a pubic hair found in the victim’s vagina match Swearingen.

The strongest evidence for Swearingen’s innocence was the remarkably intact condition of the corpse. Judging by such elements as the presence of bug larvae on the body, forensic experts agree that Melissa’s body couldn’t have been in the park for more than several days.  Estimates range from 3 to a maximum of 14, meaning the body was dumped in Sam Houston National Forest long after Swearingen had been locked up. Her internal organs were virtually intact, an impossibility if a body had been dead for 25 days.  A corpse would lose 90% of its body weight over that time, but her body weighed only four pounds less than at her last doctor’s visit.  (Cold weather could have preserved the body longer, but the average high temperature that December was in the 60s.)  According to an article in the Texas Monthly, “Her corpse was not bloated, and police reported no foul smell. In fact, the hunters had initially thought she was a mannequin.”  Furthermore, investigators had already searched that area three times.

None of these forensic experts testified at Swearingen’s trial.  This demonstrates another reason for many false convictions: the inability of the defense to afford their own experts. (According to Swearingen, it also explains his panicky decision to fabricate a letter.)

At her trial testimony, the county coroner estimated that the body had probably been there 25 days – remarkably, the exact number of days she had been missing. Years later, when confronted with the testimony of forensic experts, she recanted. (She was no longer the county coroner, having moved to Indiana.)  In addition, well after the trial, it was learned that the prosecutors had withheld evidence that, at the time of her disappearance, Melissa had been receiving threatening phone calls at her job at a call center, and was possibly being stalked.  A co-worker who had picked up some of those calls claimed in a deposition that the voice on the other end was definitely not Swearingen, who had gone to school with her.

A particularly appalling element in this case is the additional charges of kidnapping and sexual assault.  There is absolutely no evidence of kidnapping – nobody saw Swearingen and Trotter leave together nor were they seen after their paths crossed in the school library, and the presence of her jacket fibers in his truck is meaningless, since it was acknowledged that they had socialized.  The evidence for a sexual assault is flimsy, and none of it points to Swearingen.  Why would the state of Texas go to such lengths to file additional charges with little or no evidence?  Because without an additional felony, Melissa Trotter’s murder would not qualify as a capital crime.

The Innocence Project, which has exonerated 301 people based on DNA evidence, is asking the state of Texas to perform tests on several pieces of evidence that were never examined, including the pantyhose. The state has refused, and the courts have backed up their decision. (The trial judge, while setting the latest execution date, declared, “I have never been reversed on a capital case by any state or Federal Court. Justice delayed is justice denied.”)  This should not be a surprise. Although twelve Texas death row inmates have been exonerated, the state still appears to be loath to admit that it could ever have made a mistake and seems indifferent to the possibility that it may execute an innocent man.  (There are many people who believe the state has already executed at least one innocent man: Cameron Todd Willingham.)

In TV procedurals like CSI and Law and Order, an occasional episode will show investigators conscientiously retracing their investigations when there is a possibility of a wrongful conviction.  This has no relationship to the real world.  In the real world, many prosecutors fight tooth-and-nail to block any re-investigation and even when confronted with compelling evidence of a wrongful conviction, deny the obvious.

And not just in Texas.  The Innocence Project is also currently fighting for the release of Joseph Buffey, who is imprisoned in West Virginia for a crime he did not commit. Buffey was charged with raping an elderly woman in 2001 and was convinced by his public-defender lawyer to accept a plea bargain.  He immediately recanted his confession and pleaded for the DNA to be tested, but the state of West Virginia refused.  When the test was finally run in May 2011, it excluded Buffey as the source of the DNA.  Yet the state refused to do a CODIS search until more than a year later, when it revealed a match to a man, currently in prison, with a long history of sexual assaults.  Still, the state is resisting releasing Buffey, insisting the two men could have worked together, despite the victim’s testimony that there was only one attacker. (She is currently suffering from dementia and unable to testify any further.) A hearing on Buffey’s fate has been delayed until March.

The Swearingen case reminds me of another recent Texas exoneration: Michael Morton’s. Pamela Colloff’s powerful two-part essay last year in the Texas Monthly recounts how Morton came home from work one day in 1986 to find his wife, the mother of his three-year-old son, bludgeoned to death.  Investigators quickly focused on Morton as the killer, based mostly on a note he had left for his wife that morning, indicating that he was angry that she had declined to have sex with him the previous night, his birthday.  A bloody bandana was recovered from a construction site 100 yards from the Morton home, but investigators declined to test it, deciding it was found too far from the murder scene to be relevant.

Despite Morton’s extensive pleas to test the bandana, the state of Texas refused until 2011.  DNA tests revealed that the blood did belong to the victim, but that secondary DNA did not match Morton.  A CODIS database search found a match, as well as a match to evidence in a subsequent Texas murder that might have been prevented by meticulous police work in 1986.  After years of stonewalling, Texas finally conceded its mistake and released Morton in late 2011.

In addition, it was learned that – surprise! – the prosecutors had withheld exculpatory evidence from the defense, namely a statement by the three-year-old that he’d witnessed the attack, and that the attacker was not his father.  The lead prosecutor, who has since become a judge, is currently the subject of a Court of Inquiry to determine if he committed misconduct in the case, as well as an investigation by the state bar.

Additional testing in the Swearingen case would cost Texas nothing more than a little money and a little time.  For all I know, the testing may implicate Swearingen, in which case Texas can be confident they have the right guy.  However, if you believe – as I do – that he is probably innocent, the testing may reveal the person who actually committed the crime.  Nearly everyone – except the Texas prosecutors – agrees that, if Swearingen’s case went before a new jury today, he would not be convicted.  Apparently the state of Texas couldn’t care less.

There are many people in the American criminal justice system – lawyers, judges, cops –who are honorable and do conscientious work.  Unfortunately, there are also far too many others whose distinguishing characteristic is the arrogant thwarting of justice and of the search for truth.  The havoc and pain they cause is a blot on the nation.  May they all rot in Hell.

RELEVANT LINKS:

Website devoted to Swearingen’s case, with an Innocence Project pet…

2009 Texas Monthly article about the case

Summary of the case at the website The Skeptical Juror

New Yorker article on Cameron Todd Willingham

Innocence Project report on Joseph Buffey

Texas Monthly article on Michael Morton

Posted in crime | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

How Accurate Were My 2012 Predictions?

Like my friend OESheepdog, I made predictions for 2012. Let’s double-check them for accuracy. Was I Nostradamus or Nostra-dumbass?

GENERAL NEWS: 

Partisanship will continue to be the rule in Washington.
Fighting will continue in the Middle East.
Lindsay Lohan will have legal troubles.
OK, I admit I took a few gimmes upfront to guarantee that my success rate wouldn’t be zero percent.

An idiotic video of a guy doing a ridiculous dance will go viral.
Another gimme.

A major newsmagazine will discontinue publishing a print copy.
That too. 

POLITICS:

The highlight of the Republican convention will be a scene involving a famous actor and an empty chair representing President Obama.  Honestly, I thought it would be Chuck Norris delivering it a karate kick, but …

Despite bizarre weather events, like a devastating hurricane in the Northeast U.S., global warming will not be mentioned in any of the Presidential debates.  Despite the continuing escalation of gun massacres, gun control will not be an issue in the Presidential campaign.  Inexplicably, rape will become a major campaign issue. Yeah, I’m surprised I got that one right. Seemed thoroughly illogical.

The Republican Presidential candidate will be compared to an Etch-a-Sketch.  No joke, I actually predicted this. Days before campaign adviser Eric Fehrnstrom’s infamous remark about Mitt Romney, I self-published my book, Send In the Clown Car, which included the following question:

Why is the Republican race like an Etch-a-Sketch?
a) Because the voters keep shaking it up, hoping to create a more appealing picture
b) Because only a child would find it intellectually stimulating
c) Because their ideas are rooted in a previous century
d) All of the above, not to mention that the product used to be manufactured in the U.S.A. but is now built in China

The most accurate election predictions will come not from an experienced pol, but from a former baseball analyst.  I meant Tim McCarver, not Nate Silver, but let me check with the judges – OK, they’re giving me credit for it.

When President Obama is declared the winner on Election Day, Karl Rove will take the result gracefully and liberals will not react with schadenfreude.  Typo. I meant to include the word “not” in the second clause, not the third.

OTHER NEWS: 

In a startling break with its prudish image, The New York Times will print a sexually salacious phrase on its front page.  Unfortunately, I was not referring to “pussy riot,” but to “swinging dicks,”which shows that my predictions are too male-centric. Mea culpa.

The Supreme Court will uphold the Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare.  However, the wording will initially confuse several major news outlets into believing that the Court has struck it down.  You may be impressed by this prediction, but expecting CNN and Fox to be incompetent is like expecting the sun to rise in the East.

When a jury fails to convict John Edwards of misusing campaign funds to hide an extramarital affair, we will realize that we have misjudged Edwards as a callous, oily-haired, cheating sleaze ball when he is, in fact, an honorable man who has been besotted by the love of his soul mate.  Well, I got the “fails to convict” part right.

A major government official, perhaps a former general, will admit to having had an extramarital affair with a woman with a Bond-girl name like “Broadwell.”  People will express their shock and disgust, then go back to downloading porn and reading 50 Shades of Grey.  An especially impressive prediction, since 50 Shades wouldn’t be published for another three months. 

The producer of a famous junk food will announce that they are going out of business, causing a ridiculous nostalgia for a product that no semi-healthy person has eaten in 30 years.  I will celebrate this correct prediction on March 12 by bursting into Mayor Bloomberg’s office and washing down a Twinkie with a 32-oz. Coke.

O.J. Simpson will find the real killers. Well, technically, if he has a mirror in his cell…

Dick Cheney will get a heart transplant. I got this one wrong. It’s only considered a heart transplant if you are replacing an existing heart.

As the dreaded “fiscal cliff” approaches, politicians will come to their senses and compromise for the greater good of the nation.  Also, I have a bridge to sell you.

Donald Trump will make a major announcement, which will turn out to be silly and anticlimactic, on a cheesy You Tube video.  Sometimes, it’s just too easy.

U.S. troops will still be fighting in Afghanistan at year’s end. I checked the newspapers and could find no evidence of our troops there, so apparently I got this one wrong.

SPORTS:

In a nationally televised game against an arch-rival, a New York Jets quarterback will run face first into his blocker’s butt, causing a fumble that is run back for a touchdown. Hey, do I know my team or what?

A New York Mets pitcher will win the Cy Young Award as best pitcher and immediately be traded. Hey, do I know my team or what? 

LeBron James will finally win an NBA championship in Miami, causing bitter sports fans in his former city of Cleveland to wonder, “Why does God hate us?” Not true. Cleveland sports fans didn’t display an ounce of bitterness. 

In the last hockey game before another NHL lockout causes the league to go dark, the Stanley Cup will, appropriately, be won by a major Canadian community. True. Los Angeles has a large community of transplanted Canadians.

Just days before the London Olympics in which his horse Rafalca will participate, Republican nominee Mitt Romney will impress the British with his gracious, supportive comments.  Well, he must have said at least one nice thing in that interview.

MEDIA: 

The Oscar for Best Picture will go to a French silent movie.  Yeah, I was just yanking your chain with … wait, you mean that really happened?

A famous actor who is a practicing Scientologist will be divorced amid rumors about his sexual orientation.  Another gimme.

President Obama, who was criticized for inviting an African-American rapper with offensive lyrics to the White House, will shake hands at the Kennedy Center with a white rock band whose lyrics include “squeeze my lemon until the juice runs down my leg,” and no one will bat an eye.  Nailed it!

There will be a new TV show called “Here Comes Honey Boo” which will be so repulsive that it will mark the end of reality TV.  There may have been some liquor involved in making this prediction.

A film about an American President will be a critical and box-office hit. Oops, I was talking about my original screenplay Fillmore, which is still looking for studio backing.

Open Salon will solve all of its technical problems.  Hey, there is still 72 hours left in the year, so I’m optimistic.

Posted in celebrities, politics, sports | Tagged | 2 Comments