As IF Times The Anti Fake News

March 28, 2016

In The Movies Maybe

Filed under: Culture,Entertainment,Politics — Tags: , , — TC @ 3:42 pm

Source: Ted Cruz on Donald Trump tweets: Who cares

All of the tabloid like headlines surrounding the battle for the Republican nomination gives a different perspective on the sanctity of the eventual office itself.

We can name numerous action movies based on the premise of protecting or rescuing the President from some terrorist or existential threat.  As the drama typically unfolds, armies of people are tasked with sacrificing their very lives if need be, to protect the safety of the President.  A literal army of people, the finest in protection armament, the cutting edge of electronic gadgetry; all are at the disposal of the Secret Service to save the President from harm.  Invariably, Morgan Freeman directs the rescue mission as if the fate of the world rests with the salvation of a politician.

And no doubt this depiction in cinema is reflective of the protocols observed in real life. This appears to make sense because the officeholder is the presumptive symbol of freedom for the entire world, not just the United States. But does it really?

Historically, leaders of nations were militarily adept and well suited to advance the fortunes of their empire.  From Genghis Khan to Julius Caesar, the empire depended on their leader’s health to preserve the integrity of the societies they ruled.  Even as recently as Winston Churchill, leaders exhibited some uniqueness of leadership, some essential irreplaceable  element that was important to the society’s survival.

Things are quite different today.  As we watch the nomination process for the potential Presidential candidate, we see that most are loathed as equally as they are loved, sometimes more so.  We see that most exhibit a stunning lack of leadership qualities and whatever moral high ground they claim is as ephemeral as the next poll. We see that the eventual winner is more likely the product of marketing, spin and bloc voting than because of any quality of leadership.  It’s about desire for the office more than the suitability. The process has become American Idol.   A survey of the candidates shows the following:

An almost septuagenarian egomaniac billionaire with the temperament of a 6 year old

A self avowed septuagenarian socialist who thinks money is like jujubes, to be given away to anyone who asks.

A preachy lawyer, who is possibly Canadian with a high dislike quotient by both parties

A professional politician who has no record of accomplishment in a lifetime of public service and whose ability to contort on every issue makes Gumby look like a piece of re-bar and who may yet be disqualified by law.

This is the cast of people, one of whom the Secret Service will be obligated to offer life and limb to keep safe after the election.  I dunno.  God forbid that any circumstance should arise when they may be called upon to extend extraordinary effort and cost to keep them safe from harm.  But as a pragmatic matter, maybe the calculus may go along these lines:  “Well he (she) wasn’t well liked anyway, he barely won the nomination and he really isn’t that special…we’ll just use the next guy.”

And that would be the end of political thriller movies involving the President.

 

 

February 22, 2016

75 Million Should Cover It

Filed under: Culture,Entertainment — Tags: , , , , — TC @ 12:08 pm

Source: Jury selection begins in Erin Andrews $75 million lawsuit against Marriott | syracuse.com

Although stupid lawsuits are as common as insults during a Trump family dinner, when it’s worth 75 million dollars and involves an attractive female ‘personality’ it’s still news. The defendants in this peeping Tom case are not only the perp, but also the Marriott hotel chain which supposedly aided and abetted the creep in allowing him to film Erin in the expected privacy of her room.

You won’t find anyone taking the side of the creep who should get whatever punishment he deserves based on existing laws.  Without the benefit of a procedural legal system, the best solution would be for Erin’s brothers or friends to take this guy out in the back alley and sh0w him some manners.  No lawyers, no judges and possibly no repeat crime.

But the Marriot company is also drawn into this as a co-defendant and likely the only party that will have to pony up $75 million in the case of a court loss.  This is preposterous. It creates a wildly asymmetric cost/benefit profile for the hotel.  Imagine that for the price of a 200 or 300 or even a 500 dollar room, the hotel is expected to provide complete and absolute security for the entire duration of the customer’s stay.  It implies that the customer can never be harmed by virtue  of putting down a few hundred bucks per night.  If that were the case, the FBI witness protection program may as well contract out to hotels.

If in fact there is the expectation that absolute privacy and safety must be ensured by the hotel, a few hundred bucks per night isn’t going to pay the cost of such security.  They may have to reassess their business model and add a few digits to all room rates in order to prepare for the lawsuit contingency. You may need mortgage brokers in the lobbies of these places. Only in the west and the U.S. in particular,  are people so delusional that they think their ‘hurts’ have a legal price tag attached to them.  Every visit to a business including hotels,  grocery stores, yoga studio, movie theaters or fast food outlets which  results in real or imagined harm would have the potential to be  lotto ticket winners.

In Erin Andrew’s case, we wonder how they arrived at the $75 million dollar damages number.  If the point was to teach Marriot a lesson, why not claim $200 million and really teach them a lesson?  I suspect that the hotel can argue that sexism is at play here, because if it were Terry Bradshaw being the victim, he’d be lucky to be offered a room upgrade on his next visit.

 

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Powered by WordPress