The Most Wonderful Time of the Year.

I saw a man standing at the corner of Madison Avenue and 57th Street - perhaps the most fashionable intersection since Anna Wintour met clothes - and he was wearing a sleeveless mink coat! A full-length, sleeveless mink coat. He looked like Conan the Vulgarian.

                     *              *               *           
Robert Bork, whose 1987 nomination to the Supreme Court was rejected by the Senate, is dead at 85. Reacting to the nomination, Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA) said, "Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could not be censored at the whim of government and the doors of the federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens for whom the judiciary is - and is often the only - protector of the individual rights that are at the heart of our democracy."

To which Mr. Bork's many, ardent supporters replied, "Sure, when you put it that way!"

               *                   *                    *
Did your mother collect guns? Mine didn't.It's just as well, too. If my mother had a weapon besides guilt, the world would be empty. Still, she did pretty well with guilt.

             *                    *                     *
Ha ha happy holidays sounds cynical. Happy ho ho holidays sounds lewd. How about,"Eat, drink and be merry?" Yeah, that's the spirit.

"KIss of Death" Starring Senate Republicans.

     “Kiss of Death” is a 1947 film noir starring Victor Mature as a reformed criminal and Richard Widmark as the killer who gets revenge on him in a particularly hideous way. He pushes the man’s crippled mother down the stairs in a wheelchair, laughing maniacally the whole time. That is what Senate Republicans did on Tuesday (12/4), minus the entertainment value. They blocked ratification of a U.N. Treaty that would protect the rights of disabled people around the world. Particularly children - in wheelchairs. How could they behave in such a Grinch-y fashion? Envy. The envy of people without spines towards people with broken ones.

      Conservatives hate the United Nations and anything connected to it.According to Jennifer Steinhauer in the New York Times (12/5) “A majority of Republicans who voted against the treaty . . . said they feared it would infringe on American sovereignty. Among their fears about the disability convention were that United Nations bureaucrats would be empowered to make decisions about the needs of disabled children - and that it could trump state laws concerning people with disabilities.” In other words, supporting the treaty would make us the U.N.’s bitch. Thus, any Republican who voted in favor would forfeit his conservative credentials and, very likely, re-election.

     It would be easier to understand their reluctance if the treaty concerned global warming, chemical weapons or, god forbid, economic policy. It doesn’t. The U.S. was asked to join 126 other countries in banning discrimination against people with disabilities. What’s more, the treaty is based on the Americans with Disabilities Act. So, instead of threatening our world leadership, the U.N. is enshrining it.

To be fair, not every Republican senators voted against ratification. Six supported it. Among them, Scott Brown (R-MA), a lame duck, Olympia Snowe (R-ME), who’s retiring and John McCain (R-AZ) who’s lame and should have retired a long time ago.

     The chief speaker in favor of the treaty was John Kerry (D-MA) and I can understand Senate Republicans resisting his appeal, but what about Bob Dole? Aging and very ill, the former Senate Majority Leader and Presidential candidate was wheeled onto the floor of Congress to personalize the issue and rally bi-partisan support. Surely, his colleagues, old and young, and the party he devoted his life to had to be influenced? Not so. They subjected him to a humiliation so public and so complete, it was almost ritual in nature.

     Ultimately, it’s not their craven grubbing for re-election, irrational fear of world organizations or even treating Bob Dole like a leaking bag of garbage that bothers me about Senate Republicans. It’s their hypocrisy. Given the chance to push a real crippled child down the stairs, I’m sure a good seventy per cent would refuse.  

Romney: 'Tis a Gift to be Simpleminded.

          Mitt Romney? He lost. Why is that empty barrel still making noise? According to Ashley Parker’s article in The New York Times (11/15) the occasion was a conference call with fundraisers and donors to his presidential campaign. Mr. Romney was attempt-ing to explain why they got nothing in return for all their millions. Something that, to his credit, he never had to do at Bain Capital. His lack of experience shows.

Mr. Romney attributed his loss to strategic “gifts” from President Obama to young people, African-Americans and the Hispanic community. Loan forgiveness, free health-care and amnesty for the children of illegal immigrants, respectively. The word “gift” is doubly significant. First, it means an outright bribe or trading favors, ward-heeler style (“Vote for me and I’ll see that my friend, the banker, loses the paper-work on your loan.” The only thing missing is a glad-handing clap on the shoulder and a schooner of beer.) Mr. Romney clearly intended that because he drew a direct connection, “A big gift to young people. They turned out in large numbers, a larger share in this election than in 2008.” Second, it implies that education, healthcare and citizenship are privileges that the powerful may choose to bestow on certain groups. Given that Mr. Romney has already stated outright (to the same audience, no less) that forty-seven per cent of the people in this country are lazy slobs who pay no taxes and gobble up government largesse, that  also seems like a good bet.

Okay, he’s good at blaming the other guy and heaping contempt upon minority groups, but did Mr. Romney say anything positive? Did he learn anything? Should the Republicans give away their own “gifts” in 2016, adopt a counter-strategy or do something entirely different? Mitt Romney doesn’t know and doesn’t care. “Frankly, we’re still so troubled by the past, it’s hard to put together our plans for the future.”

Romney's Statistics: Like a Lottery, But More Random.

     Mitt Romney’s Presidential campaign never lacks the necessary facts and figures. Perhaps, that’s because he invents them. Take the unemployment statistic that he employed against President Obama in the last debate. He claimed that the national unemployment rate may be 7.8%, but when you add all the people who stopped looking, it’s more like 10.7%. How does he know? How does anyone know? Do people call up the Dept. of Labor and say, “That’s it. I’m done. No more looking for me. Don’t try to change my mind. I’m stopping as of now.”

Suppose Mr. Romney contacted one of his offshore banks – you know,  the ones he uses to avoid paying taxes – and instead of getting his balance, they say, “Don’t worry, it’s a lot. No, really, a bunch. You want a figure? How about, oh, $25,000? You want us to count it?” That, essentially, is the answer he gave to a woman at the debate, who asked him a very specific question about what deductions (mortgage, education, children, charities) would be sacrificed to pay for his proposed across-the-board tax cuts. He replied that a fixed amount of, “I’ll pick a number,” $25,000 may be deducted any way she chooses. First, that’s a “voucher” system, regardless of what he calls it. Second, why $25,000? Why not $10? Extreme tax cuts, as this woman clearly understood, require extreme measures to underwrite them. Even gutting middle-class tax deductions may not be enough. What’s surprising is not that a Republican President or other official is forced to raise taxes after promising he wouldn’t, that’s S.O.P. for the G.O.P. What’s surprising is that Mitt Romney won’t even admit the possibility. In his defense, though, he can’t. 

       If he allows the slightest amount of complexity to color his judgment of Obama’s performance, he’d have to admit that Presidents are not gods and that campaign promises are closer to prayers than to miracles. Then, faster than a day trader loses his shirt, his entire campaign is gone! Mitt Romney has nothing to offer except direct criticism of President Obama. Take “The last four years” out of anything he utters and see what’s left. Very little  - except, what was it, another number, definitely not a fact, but a figure. Something about 47 %.

It began as the number of people who don’t pay taxes and became – in his head or maybe just in his mouth – the number of lazy slobs sucking at the public tit. The truth of it (that it includes retirees, working poor and servicemen on active duty) is almost incidental because he was saying it in private to an audience he believed already believed it. The other lies and imaginings were said in front of sixty five million people. They were intended not only to misinform us, but to mislead us. By insulting our intelligence in this way, Mitt Romney has extended his contempt for the 47% to the other 53% as well. Before, he was just a bad choice for President. Now, he’s 100% wrong.

John Silber 1926-2012:Too Negative does not make a positive.

John Silber, former President of Boston University, was an unhappy man. Growing up in Texas with a deformed arm, he endured a lot of mistreatment. His later life was shadowed by the death of his son, David, from AIDS at the age of 41. Yet, the former did not help him deal with the latter because it didn’t teach him sympathy, only bitterness.

His career in politics was stunted – along with that of Gov. John Connally of Texas  - when President John F. Kennedy was assassinated. An attempt to revive this career was cut short when, thirty years later, Silber ran for Governor of Massachusetts and lost.

He was meant to hold power, though, and hold it he did as President of Boston University. John Silber took a commuter school with shaky finances and made it into a national university with a large endowment and distinguished visitors among its faculty. In the process, however, he ended some truly excellent programs, alienated everyone from deans down to freshmen and became a millionaire in office. What’s more, BU’s relative position, particularly within the greater Boston area, never changed. Better than a lot, but not as good as some. True distinction has always eluded it.

Finally, despite his vaunted achievements, no one has ever copied John Silber’s methods. Why? Because, as an academic, he taught Richard III by example. Silber was a smart man, who wielded his intelligence like a blunt object. A strong man, who traded in pain. A proud man, who humiliated others. Everything he achieved could have - and has – been done with far less human cost. If John Silber has no followers, it’s because no one ever worked with him, only under him. In the end, he may have taught Ozymandias, too.

A Wandering blogger I: A Post of Votes and Akins, Election Gaffes and Romney.

But no dreamy lullabies. It may seem like we should be saying, “goodnight” to the Republicans, but there’s still time for the Democrats to blow it. There’s always time for the Democrats to blow it.

                       

Deliverance? Home-Schoolers Squeal Like Pigs For Akins.

Sen. Todd Akins (R) running for re-election  in Missouri has lost the support of the Republican Party, his party, but that doesn’t stop him. He believes he can make up for the loss of campaign funds and official sanction by rallying support among people who home-school their children. They are, according to John Eligon’s article in The New York Times (9/26/12) “Deeply religious people who want a biblical worldview to be part of their children’s studies, and many connect on a spiritual level to Mr. Akins.” Not only because he and his wife home-schooled their own six children, but because, as a State Representative, Mr. Akins was instrumental in killing a bill that would have required home-schooled students to take the same standardized tests as children in public schools. Sen. Todd Akins, by the way, lost his party’s support after stating – on television – there’s something about a woman’s vagina that keeps her from getting pregnant after a “Legitimate rape.” Now, he’s seeking votes from people who don’t believe in Evolution.There’s something appropriate about that.

            I Kid Because He Cares.

After something dumb he said appeared on television (imagine that) Mitt Romney is desperately trying to repair his image. I don’t use “desperately” lightly. While campaigning in Ohio, perhaps the most critical “swing state,” Mr. Romney told NBC’s Ron Allen, “One hundred per cent of the kids in [Massachusetts] had health insurance. I don’t think there’s anything that shows more empathy and care about the people of this country than that kind of record.” First, convincing one person that you care is difficult, especially if they have reason to think otherwise – which is usually the case. Convincing a majority of the voters in Ohio, much less an entire nation? Second, if you do convince swing voters that healthcare reform is a good idea, you’ve lost your base. Remember them? All the Republicans who hate the idea and disdain it as Obamacare. Third, if reforming health care proves that you’re sensitive and care about people, then all the Republicans who oppose it (see above) are cold and uncaring. Is that what you want to say?  Fortunately for you, but not for us, the Republican Party can’t withdraw its support – like it did for Sen. Akins – because you’re their candidate for President of the United States and it’s six weeks before the election! Romney, we hardly knew ye

MITT ROMNEY: IN HIS HEART, HE KNOWS YOU ROT.

People paid $50,000 to have dinner with Mitt Romney, so he owed them more than a canned speech. He tried to level with them, but that was a bad idea. Instead of the private thoughts of a public person, they got an unwholesome hash of half-understood strategy and ignorant prejudice. Okay, it was a mistake. Clint Eastwood did worse at the convention. At least, Romney did it in private. Right? Not exactly. When his secretly recorded comments were made public, the Republican Presidential candidate had a lot of explaining to do. 

First, he tried to quiet the uproar by confessing that his views were “Not elegantly stated.” That didn’t matter because the message was clear: poor people suck. He copped to the message, but, according to Jim Rutenberg and Ashley Parker’s front-page article in The New York Times (9/19/12) said it helped voters define the philosophical choice between him and President Obama. Except there’s nothing philosophical about calling forty-seven per cent of the country a bunch of weak, lazy, greedy sponges who live off entitlements and will vote for Obama just to keep the gravy train rolling.

Next, Romney tried to reframe his comments as an argument for limiting the role of government in American life. Really? Did Mr. Romney want to go there? The man who, as Governor of Massachusetts, created the model for national healthcare reform? Who, running for the Republican Presidential nomination, defended the government bailout of banks and, as candidate, defended both Medicare and Social Security? The only person in his campaign who might credibly argue for limited government is his running mate, Paul Ryan, who has limitations of his own. He thinks the literary novelty, Ayn Rand, is a great intellectual and not the reason that Alan Greenspan’s economic theories collapsed. 

What about taxes? A Republican politician has to talk about taxes and Mitt Romney obliged his wealthy audience by criticizing people who don’t pay income tax. Not them, of course. He meant the forty-seven per cent that bloat the government with their lust for entitlements. This coming from a man who has hidden more money offshore than Captain Kidd – and in the same places. Without actually defending those comments (He couldn’t. The figure of forty-seven per cent includes retirees, working poor and soldiers in combat zones)  Mr. Romney, again, tried to reframe them by suggesting, as the NY Times article states, “That it is time for a full debate about dependency, entitlements and what his campaign characterized as a long history of Mr. Obama’s support for ‘redistributionist’ policies.” First of all, Mitt Romney calling for any kind of debate is a small dog barking at a big one. Second, the greatest redistribution of money in American history was under President Reagan. It went from the middle class to the upper class. He shouldn’t bark 

up that tree, either. 

It’s not what Mitt Romney said or how he said it that concerns me. I know many people who are vastly more prejudiced and very few who speak in full sentences and express clear, complete thoughts. What bothers me is how Mr. Romney falls exactly in the middle. He is utterly average and wants to be President of the United States. Painfully ordinary yet thinks that he should be leader of the free world. Look at the clumsy way he tried to make up for this recent blunder. No artful dodging or crafty charm that might compel our grudging respect. Only the demi-cunning of someone, anyone trying to avoid embarrassment. We deserve better.

Four Questions or Why The 2012 Republican National Convention Was Easy To Pass Over.

1) Why is the Vice-Presidential candidate Paul Ryan like a little kid at the dinner table? He needs the federal budget to prop him up or he'll disappear completely.

2) How can New Jersey Governor Chris Christie emit so much hot air and still look like a balloon in The Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade? 

3) What do you call an 82-year old man with no experience in improvisational comedy, who attempts it alone in front of the entire nation? Clint Eastwood.

4) Why is Presidential candidate Mitt Romney like a bad science-fiction movie? He's an empty suit without the entertainment value of

The Invisible Man.

Oh, My Akin Head.

      You can be a no-neck, lowbrow, knuckle-dragging Snopes and I don’t care, but don’t leave Texas – or Missouri. Go ahead, marry your cousin, but, please, don’t have children. If you insist on having children then under no circumstances should you ever allow them to hold public office. If you do, then they’ll be like Tom Head of Lubbock, Texas.

      He’s a judge of some sort and as Manny Fernandez reports in The New York Times (8/27/12) he expects civil unrest if President Obama is re-elected. What’s more, Mr. Head thinks the president will send United Nations forces into Lubbock  to stop any uprising. “‘He’s going to try to hand over the sovereignty of the United States to the U.N.’ Mr. Head said [on local television] ‘O.K., what’s going to happen when that happens? I’m thinking worst-case scenario: civil unrest, civil disobedience, civil war maybe.And we’re not talking just a few riots here. Were talking Lexington, Concord, take up arms and get rid of the guy.’ And if the president did send in United Nations troops, Mr. Head continued, “I don’t want ‘em in Lubbock County. O.K. So I’m going to stand in front of their armored personnel carriers and say, ‘You’re not coming in here.” And the sheriff. I’ve already asked him. I said, “You gonna back me?’ He said, ‘Yeah, I’ll back you.’”

           Don’t trust The New York Times? How about The Lubbock Avalanche-Journal? (Avalanche must mean something else in Texas) “Which wrote in an editorial that Mr. Head ‘Threw civility out the window and went in a bizarre direction that not only embarrassed himself but all county and West Texas residents.’”

         The only thing worse than bringing someone like Tom Head into the world is educating him. Then he becomes Rep. Todd Akin (R) of Missouri. A six-term member of Congress, who claimed, also on local TV, “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.” That is, it can prevent an unwanted pregnancy.

         As they say down in Texas, “You buy ‘em books and you buy ‘em books and they just chew on the covers.”

Romney and Ryan: Lifestyles of the Rich and Fanatic.

     Mitt Romney needs advice. It looks like he’s planning his own campaign and that’s never a good idea. So, here is my advice to Mr. Romney, unsolicited and free: Own the tax thing. Say, “The great thing about this country is you can get so rich that you never have to pay taxes. I am proud to be that rich. Vote for me and you’ll be that rich, too.”  That way, any taxes he’s ever paid in his life, are a bonus. Plus, it’s a campaign promise that can’t be topped. How can you beat instant wealth? It has to be instant because if you think people are impatient waiting for jobs (which they don’t really want, but are better than nothing) try telling them, “You’ve won the lottery, but there will be a slight wait for your money.” What can the Democrats offer instead? Power over life and death? “Vote for me and you can kill one person without consequences.” Better yet, “You can exchange murders and kill someone you don’t know.” Call it, Strangers on a Campaign. Maybe not.

     That leaves making an economic argument, which Democrats are famously bad at. “If no one pays taxes, the deficit will increase.” First, like many Democratic notions, it begins in mid-air and goes up. Second, no one cares about the deficit. The next generation? Screw ‘em. If you really care about them, repeal the estate tax. Do you think President Reagan cared about the deficit when he was tripling it? Hell, no. “Star Wars” could have been the name of his economic program: send the deficit to the stars and use war to bring it down. Instead, he called it, “Trickledown Economics,” a name so filled with contempt for the people it was supposed to help that only “The Great Communicator” could sell it

     The only people who really care about the deficit are tight-assed, bean counters like Paul Ryan. Oops. I meant people like Paul Ryan. You know the type: sharp, but dull guys who can think of a million ways to go from A to B, but can’t even imagine C – especially when it stands for Consequences. Don’t think, for a second, that I’m underestimating Mr. Ryan. Anyone who can grab the third-rail of American politics (reducing or eliminating Medicare/Social Security) and get stronger is not of this Earth. Paul Ryan resembles The Terminator without looking like Arnold Schwarzenegger. The only thing I’m sure he can’t do – and you shouldn’t try, either – is to convince people that you want to protect Medicare/Social Security. No one will ever believe you. You’ve already tried? Then don’t compound the mistake by suggesting that the Obama administration is the real threat to social programs. You’ve done that, too? Hmmm. Can I get back to you? 

History of the Decline of "The Fall Project."

     Maybe Woody Allen shouldn’t make a movie every year? Judging from his latest film, To Rome With Love, it now takes him longer to make one of acceptable quality. To Rome With Love is simple-minded instead of charming, clichéd instead of sophisticated and slightly less Italian than The Olive Garden. Oh, it’s not funny.

     The film has four plots, none of which intersect. One involves Roberto Benigni as an average man who wakes up and - for no reason - is world-famous. It’s a premise that can be treated any number of ways: from a Thurber-esque fable to a Kafka-esque nightmare. Instead, we get an extended sketch about reporters in Benigni’s bathroom and it stops – it doesn’t end – when, with equal randomness, he’s no longer famous. Ahh, but Woody must have a lot of insight into the perks and perils of fame. I’m sure he does. He should use them sometime.

         Alec Baldwin plays a wise, older man giving advice about women to Jesse Eisenberg, who may – in some fashion – be his younger self. Seems like a rich vein for Woody Allen to mine, but he commits – shockingly – a freshman mistake in writing. He doesn’t know who the main character is. Is it Eisenberg, who reacts to the presence of a sexy visitor in the home he shares with his girlfriend? Baldwin, who drifts in and out, sounding wise, but not saying anything specific or consequential? Or is it Ellen Page, the (supposedly) sexy visitor. Her arrival – and abrupt departure – seem to define the action, but otherwise seems tangential to the other characters and their relationships.

     The third leg supporting this wobbly buffet is a sketch (they’re all sketches even if they last twenty-five minutes) about a newlywed groom caught in a compromising position – it’s a misunderstanding – with a prostitute played by Penelope Cruz. The fourth is a one-joke riff so weak that it has to be propped up before Woody Allen can beat it to death: a man who sounds like an opera star in the shower becomes an opera star by singing in the shower – on stage! Get it? The shower is on stage and the

audience goes wild! What’s more - this will kill you - he’s played by a real opera singer! By the way, the entire movie takes place in Rome. You can tell because the Coliseum is in the background. To make it even more Roman, it begins with an offscreen car crash because they’re such bad drivers. (Those crazy Italians!) The title, To Rome With Love, was clearly a marketing decision: it’s short, easy to say and mentions the client’s name in a positive way. That had to be the reason he chose it. Making a play on the title, From Russia With Love, stopped being clever in 1963. Okay, 1964.      

     Last year’s Midnight in Paris, on the other hand, had real charm and more than 

a dose of sophistication. It was imbued with Parisian history and culture. Why the difference? Maybe he likes Paris more than Rome? He definitely seems more engaged by French art and music, devoting entire movies to them. To Rome With Love, on the other hand, opens with “Volare,” a song that – even ironically – should not be used again until 2058. The point is – Woody Allen seemed to care more about his last movie more than his current one. Why? Even if he’s killing time or financing his vacation – a tax-deductible one at that – he should care about what he’s making. More importantly, he should care about the movies he has made.

     Woody Allen has a legacy – a body of work – unlike any other filmmaker. What’s more, he’s beloved as a character and a public figure. (I’ve seen around fifty of his films, some about a million times each. Yeah, I’m a fan.) Not that he should start riding the honors circuit or become a father-figure to young filmmakers (Hey, this is Woody) Or that he should do anything that he doesn’t want (Again, this is Woody) but he should realize his obligation not to dilute his body of work. Not to lower the average quality of his films. His career, for all his vaunted independence, doesn’t belong to just him anymore. If he needs a hobby, fine. How about needlepoint? He shouldn’t, however, amuse himself at the expense of his – as the French say – ouevre. That’s careless.

Kenneth Lonergan's Medieval Play: Thou Swollen and Not Witty

                  Someone has to say “no” to Kenneth Lonergan, so I guess it’s up to me. His Medieval Play, currently at the Signature Theatre Center in Manhattan, is misconceived, not funny and has a terrible title.

         I assume it’s intended to be a comedy because the claque in the two unsold rows behind us started laughing before a word was spoken. (At rise, neither the sets nor costumes were risible.) When the two main characters, knights in armor, finally spoke, those laughs turned to howls. What the characters said were reams of facts about the play’s time and place. If this was an attempt to be mock heroic or to mock conventions of exposition, it failed. It wasn’t funny, either. Even if it was funny, it went on too long. Far too long. Even if it didn’t go on too long, it shouldn’t have been repeated several times in the first act because it wasn’t a running gag, he didn’t top the gag nor did he change it’s meaning by changing the context. It did, however, succeed in establishing a level of cleverness for the play.

A level that was achieved, but not surpassed by two other pieces of business. One is a knight taking a squatting crap at center stage. A long one, too. I don’t know how long, but I wanted something to read. The other highlight is St. Catherine of Siena dropping f-bombs like The Flying Nun on a strafing mission. (The actor playing her, Heather Burns, is - like any good saint – covered from head to toe except for her face. Bearing, however, a strong resemblance to former supermodel, Paulina, it works to her advantage.)

I should say at this point that I was in a good, even generous, mood when I saw Medieval Play. I loved two of Mr. Lonergan’s previous plays, This is Our Youth and Lobby Hero. This production had an excellent cast including - in addition to Ms. Burns - Tate Donovan and John Pankow. The Signature Theatre Center is brand new and designed by no less an architect than Frank Gehry. It is spacious, comfortable, conveniently located in midtown and houses both an ambitious café and a bar that serves excellent cocktails, one of which I enjoyed before the performance. The theatre, one of three in the center, where I saw Medieval Play is well-proportioned, with great sight lines and acoustics. Perhaps best of all – and certainly the most surprising aspect – is that every ticket for the performance retails at $25! (A variety of major sponsors makes that possible.) So, why did this play fail to justify even that low a price?

Part of the reason may be that Kenneth Lonergan is a Playwright In Residence at the Signature Theatre Center. I’m not certain, but I’m pretty sure that mean he’s pretty sure of getting produced. What’s more, he directed Medieval Play himself. Together, it’s a lack of supervision that, shall we say, encourages excesses. The first act alone clocks in at a less than crisp hour-and-a-half.  Too long for most plays and much too long for a comedy. (I don’t know how long the second act is.) No excess thought, however, was expended on coming up with a title. Medieval Play? That would suck as a working title. Then there are the promotional materials. What could be visually richer and more fascinating than medieval culture? Mr. Lonergan seems to think it’s his face. His picture appears in every ad, poster and program for the show. The look I think he’s going for is Brad Pitt with bed head. The one he gets is – well, let’s say he misses insouciant by a mile.

Mitt Romney. By A Hair.

Voting for Mitt Romney is like buying a box of hair color for men.


1) You're buying the paper-thin image of a handsome man with distinguished-looking grey hair.


2) You're getting hair color, which - by its nature - is a form of genteel fraud.


3) If you use it, you'll get amateur results while being done over by professionals.

With Friends Like Mitt Romney . . .

Mitt Romney is like a rich friend who lends you an expensive suit for your job interview.


If you don't get the job, you can't blame him - or the suit. 


If you do get hired, you've just used an expensive suit to get a job wearing a paper hat or - if you're really lucky - a shirt with your name on it.


Either way, he gets his suit back. 


And becomes leader of the free world. 

Detective School Graduation

     Greetings, class of 2012. A few words of wisdom from Raymond Chandler before you hit the mean streets. In the story, "Trouble Is My Business," Chandler writes, "Anna Halsey was about two hundred pounds of middle-aged, putty-faced woman in a black tailor-made suit. Her eyes were shiny, black buttons, her cheeks were as soft as suet and about the same color. She was sitting behind a black glass desk the size of Napoleon's Tomb and she was smoking a cigarette in a black holder that was not quite as long as a rolled umbrella. She said, 'I need a man.'"


     Beginnings are important. They can tell us a lot about the rest of the story, even determine it to a certain extent,but no one should presume to guess the end from the beginning. Especially with a mystery. The same is true of you. It's fine to have ambitions and feel you have a grip on the future, but not too tight. A relaxed grip is best.


     "I need a man good-looking enough to pick up a dame who has a sense of class, but he's got to be tough to swap punches with a power shovel. I need a guy who can act like a bar lizard and backchat like Fred Allen, only better, and get hit on the head with a beer truck and think some cutie in the leg-line topped him with a bread stick."


     This passage is both prescriptive and descriptive. It prescribes the kind of man that Anna Halsey claims to need. Indeed, the sort of person that any man would proudly be. Right down to knowing who Fred Allen is. But this passage also describes Anna as a woman who knows what she wants. Not literally, of course, but vividly and explicitly. That's a good quality. Have goals, but don't get hung on specifics. Note that Anna never says why she wants this man or even if she expects to find him.


     "'It's a cinch,' I said, 'You need the New York Yankees, Robert Donat and the Yacht Club boys.'"


     Don't ever take yourself too seriously. Who was Robert Donat?       He was a lot of people, he was an actor.


     "'You might do,' Anna said, 'cleaned up a little.'"


     You might, too. Congratulations. And good luck.

Strip Search And Other Bad Surprises.

"The Supreme Court on Monday ruled by a 5-4 vote that officials may strip-search people arrested for any offense, however minor, before admitting them to jails even if the officials have no reason to suspect the presence of contraband."

The New York Times

4/3/12

If a poor man is arrested for wrong, little or no reason (I've heard it happens) corrections officers can now perform an invasive strip search of him. That means search his rectum for weapons. Yet, if the same man has prostate cancer, the same Supreme Court Justices can - by ruling against the insurance mandate - condemn him to death by making health care unavailable to him. In other words: if you go to the joint, you join the second-joint club, but if you need a manual prostate exam, the government washes its hands.

"So we sang the chorus from Atlanta to the sea/As we were counting the corpses."

Scholars have raised the official body count of The Civil War to 750,ooo. An increase of approximately twenty per cent. That makes my morning. The Civil War is now - officially - bloodier, deadlier and more tragic than I ever thought. Thanks.

"As we were golfing through Georgia"

I don't think anyone's ever had their Bar Mitzvah at the Augusta Country Club, home of the Masters Tournament. Likewise, their Ladies Room has always been hard to find. So, learning of their racist history is not exactly a surprise. Yet, I was shocked when an article by Karen Crouse on the front page of The New York Times (4/3/12) quotes Clifford Roberts, one of the club's founders in 1933 and a longtime Masters chairman, as saying, "As long as I'm alive, all the golfers will be white and all the caddies will be black." It's just so . . . blunt. There it is - in black and white. Literally. Mr. Roberts, by the way, died in 1977.

The Supreme(s) Court: You Can't Hurry Health.

I need healthcare

To ease my mind.

I need to find a doctor to call mine

But Scalia said:

You can’t hurry health

No, you just have to wait.

He said health don’t come easy

It’s a game of give and take.

But how many chest pains

Must I stand before I find a doc

To let me live again.

Right now, the only thing

That keeps me hanging on

When I feel my strength, yeah

It’s almost gone

I remember Scalia said:

(Chorus)

How long must I wait?

How much more can I hack

Before Antonin will cause a heart,

Heart attack?

(Chorus)

Now my healthcare seems unlikely

But I keep on waiting

Anticipating for that soft voice

That says, “Walk toward the light.”

For some ghostly arms

To hold me tight.

I keep waiting.

I keep on waiting

But it ain’t easy

But Scalia said:

(Chorus)

Greg Smith in "The Sweet Smell of Sachs Excess."

Ex-Goldman Worker Said To Seek Book deal

The New York Times

3/23/12

A literary agent, Simon N. Scheister, meets aspiring author, Greg Smith, in the kind of fancy, but bad, restaurant that impresses people with no taste.

SMITH

I see this book as a coming-of age story. A young man gets the job of his dreams, investment banker at Goldman Sachs, only to discover that all they care about is money.

SCHEISTER

Unless the age he’s coming of is twelve, we’ve got a problem.

SMITH

Why?

SCHEISTER

Every knows that bankers are greedy slobs.

SMITH

I didn’t.

SCHEISTER

No one thinks that Wall Street exists for any purpose except making rich people richer.

SMITH

I did.

SCHEISTER

Don’t get me wrong. Stoking the furnaces of American industry is noble and makes a great mural. It just makes a lousy book.

SMITH

But what about Wall Street’s fall from grace? It’s epic. Especially at Goldman Sachs, which was known for its high standards. Their corporate culture was the secret sauce that made them great. Not anymore. What’s happened to them is an American tragedy.

SCHEISTER

Not without a murder. Know someone who was dispatched – preferably with an oar to the head?

SMITH

Of course not.

SCHEISTER

Hmm. Would you consider killing yourself?

SMITH

Excuse me?

SCHEISTER

Death Of A Bond Salesman. It reeks American tragedy. But it may put undue pressure on your writing style.

SMITH

In what way?

SCHEISTER

“Secret sauce?” That was fresh when MacDonald’s was new.

SMITH

Thank you, Mr. Schuster –

SCHEISTER

Scheister.

SMITH

But, I’m not sure –

SCHEISTER

Greg, may I call you Greg, I’m trying to help you. But you’ve got help me. I buy the whole fall from grace thing, I do. But, take it from one who knows, it’s not the fall that sells book, it’s the hitting bottom. What kind of wretched excess can you give me? Kinky sex? Boardroom depravity? If it’s lurid enough and we package it right, I may be able to arrange an advance.

SMITH

An advance? I was published in The New York Times. My name was on the evening news. I expect a huge advance.

SCHEISTER

I don’t want to promise anything, but an advance in the high two figures is not out of the question.

SMITH

I’m beginning to think a book is out of the question.

SCHEISTER

You discourage quickly.

SMITH

Unless I’m paid enormous sums of money on a regular basis, I discourage instantly.

SCHEISTER

The writer’s life may not be for you.

SMITH

I don’t want to be a writer. I want to write a best seller.

SCHEISTER

How about self-help?

SMITH

There’s nothing wrong with me.

SCHEISTER

For other people. If you can tell them how to get a job at Goldman Sachs –

SMITH

That’s the complete opposite -

SCHEISTER

Stay with me, Hemingway. People want to know, they crave knowing how you got hired at Goldman Sachs: the hard work, the preparation, the personal dedication, they’ll read it all twice if they think it’ll help them. Throw in some tips on rising in the ranks and I think we’re talking about the kind of money you want.

SMITH

I’m sorry, Mr. Schuster –

SCHEISTER

Scheister.

SMITH

I seemed to have wasted your time.

SCHEISTER

And I’m sorry, Mr. “Smith,” but you’re not the only former Goldman executive who wants to write a book. I’m not a leg breaker, believe me, I’m strictly into the smooth angles of this business, but I have an offer from a former chairman of Goldman, who was also a governor and a senator. He needs a lot - I mean a bushel - of money very fast and is willing to write what is necessary.

SMITH

This “self-help” book . . . how positive does it have to be?