Sunday, June 15, 2008

Was 'The Happening' Even Environmental?

I saw it last night, and I just didn't get as upset as I normally would by the subject matter. It was definitely presented in a more Twilight Zone manner than preachy one, and I found the focus of the movie to be more on the creepiness of visuals of mass suicides and on the relationship between the main characters.

As for the environmental message, I don't know. The plants totally blew away some of the most reliably blue-state states on the map, and then headed for Paris of all places. Maybe Nature was tired of being disrespected by environmentalists as not being able to take care of itself and decided to shut some of them up.

Here's a map, the 'event' didn't even touch any red states, it was New York, New Jersey, and eastern Pennsylvania. I didn't see any loggers going down, and the protagonists escaped in the most gas-hogging vehicle in the movie, a roughly 10 mpg, early 80s Jeep Grand Wagoneer. The plant-whisperer guy got taken out as well.

All of that is in jest obviously, but if you think you'd be irritated by any message in the movie, I would say just watch it to watch it and enjoy the 'what if' aspect of it. It's not great, but it's got some memorable moments.

To Republicans Not Voting For McCain

I am exhausted listening to 'pricinpled' conservatives, and the vast majority of talk radio, bad-mouthing the idea of voting for McCain. The reasons range from "he doesn't respect us" to "bring on the bad times, then blame the Dems." That charts out a territory roughly from 'hypersensitive' and 'immature' on up to 'idiot'.

The primaries are over. Were there perfect choices? Not really. Were there good ones? Yeah, in my opinion. Would I take all of the top ones over Obama or Hillary? Yes.

The thing about teaching the voters a lesson by electing Obama is, we've got to live through those 4-8 years. I'm not interested in paying higher taxes, in socializing medicine, in waiting out more liberal judges to retire. I'm not interested in the Obamas 'healing my soul'.

John McCain is reliably for lowering taxes and earmarks. For those that claim to care, he's pro-life and anti-gay-marriage. You want to throw those positives in the toilet? Have at it. But don't expect anyone to listen to your childish demands next time around, just go join Buchanan or the Constitution Party and take your tears and diapers with you. I'm interested in winning, in improving, and living.

Does it take a Carter to get a Reagan?

Short answer: No.

If you actually believe in limited government, in allowing people to reach their potential and keep their work's rewards, this argument is just ridiculous. In essence, you are saying that Reagan's (or general conservative/libertarian) ideas are only truly attractive when looked at from some of the worst years since World War II.

Needless to say, I don't think that's the case. Limiting government is attractive, both in a practical and idealistic sense, at any time, compared to any other form of government.

If you think Reagan's great only when compared to Carter, I don't think you really know the meaning of the word 'great'.