The 118th United States Congress

[mtutiger]

2 minutes ago, Tigerbomb13 said:

The Hillary body count continues…

It's almost like February 24, 2022 never happened lol. Just gets ignored every single time.

[Tigerbomb13]

1 minute ago, mtutiger said:

It's almost like February 24, 2022 never happened lol. Just gets ignored every single time.

Someone invaded Ukraine on that day. Maybe some day we will know who. 

[romad1]

11 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

It the same dichotomy as Nickelson in 'A Few Good Men' but Jack played it over the top enough so that listening to the argument wasn't the point. The difference between the ambiguity of the 70's and the self assuredness of the 90's

But it's Von Sydow that makes TDOTC. He is beyond perfect. His is the only real truth in that universe.

For me...important caveat..."A Few Good Men" is broken.  After having been in organizations most of my life where leadership is under a microscope, "The Caine Mutiny" is the real deal.  It actually looks at the obligation of the follower and the nuances of what followership means.  Fred Macmurray's character cravenly created a situation out of his dislike for the Navy and he caused the problem with Queeg/Bogart's leadership.   Jose Ferrar chastising him at the end of the movie is beyond brilliant.

[romad1]

So f'in good

 

None of this computes with the Trumpies of course. 

[romad1]

I like the dig at Arthur Miller

[romad1]

25 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

It the same dichotomy as Nickelson in 'A Few Good Men' but Jack played it over the top enough so that listening to the argument wasn't the point. The difference between the ambiguity of the 70's and the self assuredness of the 90's

But it's Von Sydow that makes TDOTC. He is beyond perfect. His is the only real truth in that universe.

Max Von Sydow is the best in TDOTC

[gehringer_2]

14 minutes ago, romad1 said:

For me...important caveat..."A Few Good Men" is broken.  After having been in organizations most of my life where leadership is under a microscope, "The Caine Mutiny" is the real deal.  It actually looks at the obligation of the follower and the nuances of what followership means.  Fred Macmurray's character cravenly created a situation out of his dislike for the Navy and he caused the problem with Queeg/Bogart's leadership.   Jose Ferrar chastising him at the end of the movie is beyond brilliant.

my only reservation about the perfectly fair moral admonitions in that last scene is that in the real world, often enough the Queegs don't have that epiphany where they are open to a reset a failed chain of command relationship. In this telling that stands as the ethical pivot point that allows this denouement the not so happy ending feel that 50's angst required. I'm fine with the allowance for artistic license, but one has to think that in a case that ever got that far, the Queeg would not have reached even Bogart's Queeg's level of awareness that he might need a change in the the situation. 

And on a semi-related note,  other truth I have learned over the years is that sometimes the people who are most insufferable under 'ordinary' circumstance, turn out to princes when the chips are down. Of course those stories don't make for good novels

[romad1]

7 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

my only reservation about the perfectly fair moral admonitions in that last scene is that in the real world, often enough the Queegs don't have that epiphany where they are open to a reset a failed chain of command relationship. In this telling that stands as the ethical pivot point that allows this denouement the not so happy ending feel that 50's angst required. I'm fine with the allowance for artistic license, but one has to think that in a case that ever got that far, the Queeg would not have reached even Bogart's Queeg's level of awareness that he might need a change in the the situation. 

And on a semi-related note,  other truth I have learned over the years is that sometimes the people who are most insufferable under 'ordinary' circumstance, turn out to princes when the chips are down. Of course those stories don't make for good novels

I have actually seen people who were absolutely terrible during one rotation are completely different and have better grasp of how to lead on another rotation 

[romad1]

10 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

my only reservation about the perfectly fair moral admonitions in that last scene is that in the real world, often enough the Queegs don't have that epiphany where they are open to a reset a failed chain of command relationship. In this telling that stands as the ethical pivot point that allows this denouement the not so happy ending feel that 50's angst required. I'm fine with the allowance for artistic license, but one has to think that in a case that ever got that far, the Queeg would not have reached even Bogart's Queeg's level of awareness that he might need a change in the the situation. 

And on a semi-related note,  other truth I have learned over the years is that sometimes the people who are most insufferable under 'ordinary' circumstance, turn out to princes when the chips are down. Of course those stories don't make for good novels

The 1950s audiences were recently in those ships and had to weigh these situations.  So “Mister Roberts” tells the story of the war against boredom as much as the struggle to stay sane.  And the dads who lived throughout that time were nodding along. 

Edited December 22, 2022 by romad1

[gehringer_2]

13 minutes ago, romad1 said:

The 1950s audiences were recently in those ships and had to weigh these situations.  So “Mister Roberts” tells the story of the war against boredom as much as the struggle to stay sane.  And the dads who lived throughout that time were nodding along. 

This is truth. There was not a post WWII movie made that featured grey ships with white numbers that I didn't see as a squirt sitting next to ex POFC/Gunnery A.G. at NBC 'Saturday Night at the Movies." (or even a few at real movie house).  'Caine Mutiny' not the least. 

Edited December 22, 2022 by gehringer_2

[Jim Cowan]

2 hours ago, romad1 said:

From time to time when I rewatch "3 Days of the Condor" even with its problematic rape scene, it comes across as a very interesting look at the issue of what is in our interest.

The final scene when Cliff Robertson and Robert Redford are arguing and Robertson is talking about the nasty things the US Government does on behalf of the people is thought provoking.   I sometimes sympathize with Robertson and I sometimes sympathize with Redford.

 

Yeah but Robertson's hair ruins everything.

[gehringer_2]

15 minutes ago, Jim Cowan said:

Yeah but Robertson's hair ruins everything.

I always thought it was an interesting symmetry that at Redford's age, Robertson had played JFK, a notable cold warrior, in a time when things looked different.

Edited December 22, 2022 by gehringer_2

[romad1]

25 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

I always thought it was an interesting symmetry that at Redford's age, Robertson had played JFK, a notable cold warrior, in a time when things looked different.

That movie also is remarkable for the technology fault line it sits on.  The heavy use of computers and the completely analog phone system.

[chasfh]

20 hours ago, romad1 said:

I like the dig at Arthur Miller

That struck me as well. Not too fine a point put on that one, was it?

Are you suggesting that Trump is Queeg, someone being set up to take the fall but who's sick and has ten times the guts of his underlings, who were the real authors of the democracy mutiny? Not trying to be pointed myself, but rather trying to properly interpret the abstruse point you're making here.

[chasfh]

20 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

my only reservation about the perfectly fair moral admonitions in that last scene is that in the real world, often enough the Queegs don't have that epiphany where they are open to a reset a failed chain of command relationship.

That epiphany moment struck me in this scene, too. The officers' consciences folded under Jose Ferrer's drunken moralizing. That doesn't happen in real life. Or at least not with the MAGA crowd.

[romad1]

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

That struck me as well. Not too fine a point put on that one, was it?

Are you suggesting that Trump is Queeg, someone being set up to take the fall but who's sick and has ten times the guts of his underlings, who were the real authors of the democracy mutiny? Not trying to be pointed myself, but rather trying to properly interpret the abstruse point you're making here.

Trump is not Queeg.  Queeg is any professional politician who played by the rules but couldn't hack the new environment of insane demands from the far right and was betrayed by the whiny MTGs and the like who were Fred Macmurray.

[romad1]

Just now, romad1 said:

Trump is not Queeg.  Queeg is any professional politician who played by the rules but couldn't hack the new environment of insane demands from the far right and was betrayed by the whiny MTGs and the like who were Fred Macmurray.

and for the rest of this imperfect analogy...  Liz Cheney is Jose Ferrar/Barney Greenwald.  Sick to her stomach at her own side.

[romad1]

Just now, romad1 said:

and for the rest of this imperfect analogy...  Liz Cheney is Jose Ferrar/Barney Greenwald.  Sick to her stomach at her own side.

Not quite sure who Steve Merrick/Van Johnson or Willie/Robert Francis are.   Its not a perfect analogy.

[CMRivdogs]

An endangered species. A Republican that sounds somewhat like an adult. I don't like him calling things like Social Security and Medicare entitlements, but then again that's what the GOP does

 

 

[chasfh]

1 hour ago, CMRivdogs said:

An endangered species. A Republican that sounds somewhat like an adult. I don't like him calling things like Social Security and Medicare entitlements, but then again that's what the GOP does

 

 

I've always hated the word "entitlements" as applied for tax-supported welfare, which almost all the recipients themselves have paid taxes for either before or currently. And yet, not only do Republicans routinely use this term, but so do Democrats, the media, and basically just about everybody calls them, as though the people who qualify for them are entitled assholes or something.

[mtutiger]

 

[oblong]

I’m not Irish. I’m Ire-ish. 

[chasfh]

That’s OK, he knows that’s no real defense. He’s giving up on it already. He knows he’s totally busted. The $64 question is whether congressional Republicans are going to ignore all that and shower him with assignments anyway. I think with those clowns, it’s 50-50 either way.

[CMRivdogs]

He fits in perfectly with MTG, Boebert, Jordan, Gohmert et al

[chasfh]

2 hours ago, CMRivdogs said:

He fits in perfectly with MTG, Boebert, Jordan, Gohmert et al

Is he of that ilk? I really don't know anything else about him. Is he going to join the Kookoo Kaukus?