The Field House

Tuesday, April 10, 2007

Jenny and Heidi Wander Into Town

Jenna and her buddy Heidi came to D.C. for their spring break, so we took them where we take all our guests -- Dixie Bones.

If you ever come visit this area, you have to get to Dixie Bones -- true, down-home Southern cooking.

Chirsty Jo Is Gettin' Hitched

Look who got engaged.

Congrats, Christy.

Thursday, April 05, 2007

Upset Over Fox Appointment, Kerry Claims Bush 'Changed the Rules' on Appointments

(This post from Chris first appeared on HE's Right Angle.)

Still smarting from his 2004 loss, delivered with the help of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and the book "Unfit for Command" written by John O'Neill and Jerome Corsi, Sen. John Kerry (D.-Mass.) accused the White House of "changing the rules" by recess-appointing Sam Fox to the post of ambassador to Belgium.

From the AP:

U.S. President George W. Bush bypassed Democratic critics and appointed Sam Fox ambassador to Belgium on Wednesday during the congressional recess in a move that avoided requiring Senate approval.

The appointment came a week after the White House withdrew the nomination when it became apparent that the Democratic-led Senate Foreign Relations Committee would not vote to approve Fox, a Republican fund-raiser.

Democrats had complained about a $50,000 donation Fox made to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a group that questioned Sen. John Kerry's war record during the Massachusetts Democrat's 2004 presidential campaign.

"It's sad but not surprising that this White House would abuse the power of the presidency to reward a donor over the objections of the Senate," Kerry said in a statement.

"Unfortunately, when this White House can't win the game, they just change the rules, and America loses," he said.

Not only do Democrats believe that free speech in the form of donations to 527 groups they don't like such as the Swift Boat Veterans should disqualify someone from serving in a federal position, they now claim -- at least their 2004 standard-bearer claims -- that a recess appointment is a "changing of the rules," despite the fact that Article II, Sec. 2, of the Constitution permits the President to make such appointments.

Former Justice O'Connor Blames Criticism of Judicial Activism -- Not Activism -- for 'Loss of Faith' in Judicial System

(This post from Chris first appeared on HE's Right Angle.)

At a conference at Southern Methodist University yesterday, former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor voiced her concern about partisan attacks on judges "coming out of the halls of Congress and out of state legislatures across the country."

Neat trick: Blaming Americans' distrust of the Judicial Branch on criticism of judicial activism instead of blaming judicial activism.

From an AP report on Fox News:

Former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said Wednesday that she has grown weary of partisan attacks on judges, criticisms that she believes are causing citizens to lose faith in the judicial system.

O'Connor detailed plans to establish a Web site to teach schoolchildren about the judicial branch of government during a speech to law students, lawyers and fellow judges at a judicial conference at Southern Methodist University.

O'Connor, 77, said she finds troubling the "increased number of attack on judges that are coming out of the halls of Congress and out of state legislatures across the country." Single-issue advocacy groups are tagging judges with labels such as "activist judges" or "godless, secular humanists" to win passage of propositions or amendments to state constitutions, she said.

"The founders of our country did not intend that Congress or the legislative branch dictate results in specific cases," O'Connor said. "I think we're hearing more criticisms about judges than I've heard in my very long lifetime."

Monday, April 02, 2007

When Is Movie Gore Good? Just Ask Roger Friedman

(This post from Chris first appeared on HE's Right Angle.)

Fox News entertainment columnist Roger Friedman has a review of the new Robert Rodriguez/Quentin Tarantino double-feature "Grindhouse" in today's Fox411 column. In it, Friedman says of the movie's blood and violence, which is a common trait in Tarantino movies:

The film often sputters and jumps on purpose to give the impression that it's a really cheap production. Indeed, the double bill presentation even carries a warning that some reels may be missing and, in fact, they are.

All of this is very, very cool, as is the music, the locales ("Planet Terror" is set in Austin, Texas; "Death Proof" shot in Central California masquerading as the Tennessee countryside) and the makeup (there's blood spurting everywhere). [...]

The package may not be for everyone. The first film is quite bloody and gory, and not for the faint of heart, that's for sure. There's one sequence of torture in the beginning that will send many scurrying under their seats. But all the violence in "Grindhouse" is broadly comic and so over the top that it's aimed at a teenage mentality.

But that's the pleasure of it, too. You can tell that both Rodriguez and Tarantino just had a ball (or balls, it's an inside joke from "Planet Terror") making these movies, and the audience has one watching them.

What makes Friedman's review and praise interesting is not his love of the movie(s) -- Tarantino is definitely very talented -- but it is his praise of the "over the top" gore that makes the movie a "pleasure." And this praise is not interesting by itself -- it's a movie review of a probably well-done, typically gory Tarantino flick, after all. It's interesting when contrasted to Friedman's ripping of Mel Gibson's "The Passion," in large part, for it's gore.

[T]he real problem with "The Passion" is that it is graphic beyond belief, and unrelenting. How anyone will be able to sit through this thing is the real mystery. There is blood, blood, everywhere. The violence toward Jesus is sadistic and grotesque. Basically, the entire second half of the film is spent watching Jesus endure physical torture never before seen in a movie. By the time it's done, actor James Caviezel's body is a map of bloody rivers and lakes with craters of flesh excised from his torso.

Is this disgusting? You bet. It's also puzzling, because what Gibson hasn't done in "The Passion" is explain his love of Christ or his own passion or devotion. We have no idea why Christ is so reviled by the Jews, what he's done to earn their anger, or what he's done to earn Gibson's respect. From the moment the film begins, Jesus is simply a target for unbridled, unrestrained bloodlust. Yes, we get to see the nails driven through him, blood spurting in every direction, skin being torn in the process.

Is there anything that's learned by witnessing this enactment? I wish I could say there was, but there isn't. It's simple brutality, with a hard rock music track playing in the background. I'm not sure that it's so different from Gibson's character dislocating his shoulder on purpose in one of the "Lethal Weapon" movies.

[...] My question is, How will the Hollywood cognoscenti respond to "The Passion"? Will they remain silent and hope it goes away? Or will someone speak out? There is no end of voices when it comes to sex and violence in mainstream movies. Where are those voices now?

In fact, Friedman's bias against "The Passion" is even more obvious when contrasted to his praise of Tarantino's "Kill Bill: Vol. 1" and "Kill Bill: Vol. 2" -- both of which were very well known for their blood-letting.

So, what did this movie critic who was so worried about the violence of "The Passion" have to say about Tarantino's "Kill Bill" movies?

From Friedman's Sept. 25, 2003, review of "Vol. 1":

[T]hese were the impressions I was left with after the screening: that it rocked, that the violence and spurting blood was cartoon-like fun. . .

From Friedman's April 8, 2004, review off "Vol. 2":

Fans of the first "Kill Bill," myself included, probably thought "Vol. 2" would be more of what was in "Vol. 1" — comic violence, sparse dialogue, and lots of groovy choreography and cinematography. It turns out that "Vol. 1" was merely a tasty appetizer for a gourmet main course. [...]

Now, all this praise doesn't mean I've recanted my feelings for "Vol. 1." That film was a visual explosion, with so much style and energy I could have seen it over and over. ... [I]n "Vol. 2" he crosses all the T's, dots the I's, and makes the audience smile even while the violence rains down.

The difference, this time, is that it's much wittier and fresher. There are some sequences, like one in which Hannah loses an eye, that are so brilliant they will never be forgotten. [...]

Have a happy Easter.

It looks like Friedman's real objection to gore is not its appearing on the screen or its seeming pointlessness. (How else do you explain his praise of Tarantino's gore?)

Though I don't believe Friedman did it on purpose (he wishes us all a "happy Easter," remember), he, like so many other Hollywood celebrators and celebrities, has revealed an all-too-common bias against the Christian message in Tinseltown.

Tuesday, March 27, 2007

Fake Brit and Fake Band Rumored to be Booked for Gore's Land-of-Make-Believe Concerts

(This post from Chris first appeared on HE's Right Angle.)

Fox News's Roger Freidman reports in today's "Fox 411" column that Madonna, who pretends to be a Brit, and Spinal Tap, who pretended to be a rock band in the mockumentary This Is Spinal Tap, are rumored to be scheduled to perform at at least one of the Live Earth climate-change awareness concerts, co-produced by former Vice President and global-warming scaremonger Al Gore.

Seems nonsense and fakery are the order of the day for the enviroligious zealots.

Sunday, March 25, 2007

Groovin' to a little Ludwig

Time for a little Beethoven. Supposedly, this will make our child a prodigy. That might be a bit of a stretch for a Bartlow family member, but it's worth a shot.

Besides, it makes a great picture.