Sunday, March 29, 2009

earth hour and...

last saturday evening, between 8:30pm and 9:30pm, we sat by candlelight, on the porch swing, and had a grand time. it was earth hour. did you turn off your lights too? i certainly hope you did.
last friday we saw the movie, i love you, man, and thoroughly enjoyed it. i give it a solid B+.
my latest film is on YouTube under, "franklandfields".
namaste, peace, and hang in there.

Friday, March 27, 2009

oh please!

Wednesday, March 25, 2009

a must see

Where In The World Is Osama Bin Laden?
i saw this movie last evening, and it is, in my opinion, one of the best documentaries i have ever seen. it is done by morgan spurlock and his group of very talented people. it answers some fundamental questions like: how do we end worldwide terrorism? how do we bring peace to the middle east? how can we all get along? and others. it is one of the finest films i have seen in my life. it is about hope, peace, facts, truth, reality, people, statistics, and other subjects. put simply, it is about life, and how similar life really is for all of us.
it runs about one hour and thirty minutes, and i can't begin to imagine how mr. spurlock was able to edit the nearly 800 hours of film that he shot. i could have watched more.
i would have been happy with a 2 or 3 hour documentary on this subject. i wanted to learn more. i recommend everybody see this film. it is well worth your time, and if you don't agree, i want to hear why.

Monday, March 23, 2009

my AIG bonus...

has not arrived yet. i am still waiting. i have however received other bonuses from this AIG situation. i think we all have. i think there is much to be learned from this. for example, if you do a little reading and research, you will learn how we got into this mess, and who is really responsible. you will learn who wrote the legislation that allowed the banks and mortgage houses and investment brokers to gamble away our money and soul. it is quite clear who is responsible. there is a clear paper trail. and it is also painfully clear who has benefited from this criminal mess. i do not work for AIG. i have never worked for AIG. i have never been offered a job with AIG. you will also learn that a man told the bush administration about the madoff scam in 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004, and they did nothing about it. the facts are clear and undeniable. will ferrell is performing in his broadway show called, you're welcome america, a final night with george w. bush, and it is a smash hit. it is on HBO now and you really ought to see it. check your local listings. it is ninety minutes long and it is brilliant. i give it my highest rating. and you can always catch my films on YouTube under, "franklandfields". enjoy. peace.

Wednesday, March 18, 2009

worth reading

Sunday, March 15, 2009


if you have not seen the current smash hit will ferrell broadway show, "you're welcome america, a final night with george w. bush", you have a chance to see it today, sunday, march 15, 2009, at 11pm, on hbo, channel 702. this is one of the best shows i've ever seen. i predict it will win a tony award. it is brilliant. please let me know your opinion. enjoy. peace out.

Friday, March 13, 2009

great article

Is Obamanomics Conservative or Revolutionary?
Wednesday 11 March 2009

by: Robert Reich

There are two ways to see Obamanomics.

The first, much preferred by the White House, is as a set of initiatives so modest as to hardly merit a raised eyebrow. Yes, steps must be taken to deal with the current economic crisis. But assuming the economy recovers next year, Obama's budget projects that government spending by the end of the decade will drop to around 22.5 percent of GDP, which is about where it was under Reagan.

What about those tax hikes on the wealthy? Obama merely restores the top two marginal income tax rates to what they were in the 1990's, the capital gains rate to its lowest level during that same prosperous decade, and the rate on dividends to a level even lower than it was in the 1990s. And even these modest reversions to the 1990's will affect only the wealthiest 3 percent of Americans, and not until 2011. Ninety-seven percent of small businesses won't pay a dime more. True, the very rich won't be able to deduct quite as much as they can now for their mortgage interest and charitable donations, but this is hardly revolutionary, either. In fact, it's another throwback - to the limits in place under Ronald Reagan. All told, taxes are projected to total 19 percent of GDP by the end of the decade. That's even lower than it was in the late 1990's.

Modest as they are, these taxes will generate enough revenue to pay for half of what's needed for universal health care, and still reduce the deficit by about $750 billion over ten years - to 3.1 percent of GDP by the end of the decade.

But isn't universal health care itself a pretty radical step? Not according to this view. The other half of what's needed to pay for universal health care will come from health-care savings that are also necessary to keep the current big health-care entitlement programs - Medicare and Medicaid - affordable. It's just common sense: Allow government to use its bargaining leverage under Medicare and Medicaid to lower drug prices, strengthen Medicare pay-for-performance incentives, and institute better disease management, prevention, and health information technologies.

What about the environment? Isn't cap and trade a huge deal? Not at all. Instead of heavy-handed regulation, it's a market solution to the problem of global warming. Government merely sets an overall cap on the amount of carbon dioxide to be allowed into the atmosphere, which drops annually, and then requires firms to bid for permits to pollute within that overall cap. Firms can buy and sell permits to each other; they can innovate to reduce pollution even further. Such a system will generate enough revenues to give 95 percent of Americans a yearly refundable tax credit of $400, and also finance research and development of renewable energy and a modernized electricity grid.

But isn't Obamanomics' approach to educational reform expensive and intrusive? No. By this view, it's very mainstream and incremental - and doesn't impose on the prerogatives of states and locales. It expands the tax credit for college tuition to $2,500 a year and increases Pell Grants to $5,500 yearly - almost negligible increases, given how fast tuitions are rising. It cuts subsidies to banks participating in the student-loan program, which is exactly what Bill Clinton did, and it provides some funds for early childhood education.

So there we have it: Obamanomics as pragmatic, incremental, centrist, even conservative.

But there's another way to view Obamanomics - as an economic philosophy exactly the opposite of the one that's dominated America for more than a quarter century.

The basic idea of Reaganomics was that the economy grows from the top down. Lower taxes on the wealthy make them work harder and invest more, and the benefits trickle down to everyone else. Rarely in economic history has a theory been more tested in the real world and proven so wrong. In point of fact, nothing trickled down. After the Reagan tax cuts, increases in the median wage slowed, adjusted for inflation. After George W. Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy, the median wage actually dropped. Meanwhile, most of the income went to the top. In 1980, just before the Reagan revolution, the richest 1 percent took home 9 percent of total national income. But by 2007, the richest 1 percent was taking home 22 percent.

Obamanomics, by contrast, holds that an economy grows best from the bottom up. Obama's program increases taxes on the top, and uses the proceeds to raise the living standards of average Americans by giving them lower taxes, better schools, and more affordable health insurance. That may not seem very radical, but compared to the last quarter-century it's revolutionary.

Reaganomics didn't believe in public investment, except perhaps when it came to the military. Everything else was considered government spending, which was assumed to be wasteful. Hence, the cuts (adjusted for inflation) during Reagan, Bush I and Bush II in education, job training, infrastructure, and basic research and development. And the reluctance to expand health insurance except when it came to corporate welfare for the pharmaceutical industry.

But Obamanomics is committed to these forms of public investment. And there's good reason: In a global economy, capital moves to wherever it can get the best deal around the globe. That means capital and jobs go to nations that can promise high returns either because labor is cheap and taxes and regulations low, or because labor is highly productive - well-educated, healthy, and supported by modern infrastructure.

Which do we want? For the better part of the last quarter-century our implicit economic strategy has tended toward the first. But that's a recipe for lower wages and lower living standards for most Americans, along with widening inequality. The only resource that's uniquely rooted in a national economy is its people - their skills, insights, capacities to collaborate, and the transportation and communication systems that link them together. Everything else - including capital, technology, designs, even plant and equipment - can move around the globe with increasing ease.

Bill Clinton talked a lot about the importance of public investment, but he failed to do much about it because he came to office during an economic expansion, and the major worry was excessive government spending leading to inflation. Obama comes to office during the biggest downturn since the Great Depression, and although he doesn't talk much about public investment his plan represents the largest commitment to it in forty years.

Reaganomics' third principle was that deregulated markets function better. They do, in many respects, but not always. And when they don't, all hell can break loose. Energy markets were deregulated and we wound up with Enron. Carbon emissions weren't controlled, and now we face global warming. Financial markets were deregulated and we have a global meltdown. Obamanomics, by contrast, accepts that government has an important role in setting the rules of the capitalist game: Setting an overall cap on carbon emissions, ensuring that products and foods are safe, maintaining the solvency and security of financial companies.

Under Reaganomics, government was the problem. It can still be a problem. But Obamanomics recognizes there are even bigger problems out there that can't be solved without government. By building the economy from the bottom up, recognizing the central importance of public investment, and understanding that markets cannot function without regulation, Obamanomics finally reverses and repudiates the economic philosophy that has dominated America since 1981.

If you look only at the small print, Obamanomics looks conservative. If you look at the big picture, it's revolutionary.

Wednesday, March 11, 2009

chocolate news

the hilariously brilliant program Chocolate News, on comedy central, is gone, at least for the moment. comedy central has chosen not to renew the shows contract. maybe we can change their mind. if you like the show, and if enough of us write to comedy central at the link above, perhaps they will bring the show back. other canceled tv shows have been saved this way. i hope we can bring back Chocolate News. thank you. peace out.
my videos are on YouTube under, "franklandfields". enjoy.

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

1 - i wonder what barbie's doin' this mornin'? it is the morning after. 50! anybody see the artist rendering of what barbie should look like in the current aarp newspaper? pretty interesting. but seriously, here's the list of what barbie really did last night to celebrate her 50th.

10 - wanted to call ken, but couldn't find his new unlisted number, or his private facebook page.

9 - got a manicure and pedicure.

8 - picked out an outfit to wear.

7 - popped a couple of alleve for those midlife aches and pains.

6 - brushed teeth, flossed, and gargled for 20 seconds with listerine.

5 - called a couple of girlfriends to arrange a rendezvous and left voicemail.

4 - fed the turtle.

3 - put on a sweater to avoid the chill.

2 - sat down to wait for her girlfriends to call back.

1 - fell asleep at 8pm in her easy chair.

welcome to fifty barbie. enjoy. i have ken's number, but he's asked that i not give it out. sorry. you might wanna try love you!


2 - theory and idea.

theory - there must be at least two people (and probably more) who don't litter, for every one person who does. at any rate, we've got them vastly outnumbered.

idea - how about those of us who don't litter, take it one step further, and simply pick up one piece (or more) of litter whenever we see it. that way, i'm theorizing, we can eliminate litter in no time at all. what do you think? is it worth a try? today i picked up two pieces of litter. please let me know how it goes for you.


on YouTube under, "franklandfields".



Friday, March 06, 2009


i give this movie an extra large bag of popcorn, with extra real butter, with an endless refill large drink, with a large box of milk duds. thumbs up and grade A+. i really enjoyed this movie. it has good everything...acting, special effects, visuals, directing, morals, lessons, dialogue, etc...
i recommend everybody see this film. the violence is not too over the top for me. the story is very timely, and the scenes quite realistic and telling. of course the opinions expressed here are my own. you may have different ones, and i'd like to hear them.
take care.
my films are on YouTube under, "franklandfields".
i'd love to hear your feedback on them.
have a glorious day.

Thursday, March 05, 2009

b-bye rush, rip

"March 4, 2009, 10:00 pm
Fears of a Clown

Once upon a time, you could drive to the most remote reaches of the United States and escape Rush Limbaugh. But from the Mogollon Mountains of New Mexico to the Badlands of South Dakota, where only the delicious twang of a country tune or the high-pitched pleadings of a lone lunatic came over the AM dial, there is now the Mighty El Rushbo.

As someone who spends a lot of time on the road, I used to find Limbaugh to be an obnoxious but entertaining companion, his eruptions more reliable than Old Faithful. But now that Limbaugh has become something else — the face of the Republican Party, by a White House that has played him brilliantly — he has been transformed into car-wreck-quality spectacle, at once scary and sad.


The sweaty, swollen man in the black, half-buttoned shirt who ranted for nearly 90 minutes Saturday at the Conservative Political Action Conference. He reiterated his desire to see the president of his country fail. He misstated the Constitution’s intent while accusing President Obama of “bastardizing” the document. He made fun of one man’s service in Vietnam, to laughter.
(J. Scott Applewhite/Associated Press) Rush Limbaugh.

David Letterman compared him to an Eastern European gangster. But he looked more like a bouncer at a strip club who spent all his tips on one bad outfit. And for the Republican Party, Limbaugh has become very much a vice.

Smarter Republicans know he is not good for them. As the conservative writer David Frum said recently, “If you’re a talk radio host and you have five million who listen and there are 50 million who hate you, you make a nice living. If you’re a Republican party, you’re marginalized.”

Polling has found Limbaugh, a self-described prescription-drug addict who sees America from a private jet, to be nearly as unpopular as Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who damned America in the way that Limbaugh has now damned the nation’s newly elected leader. But Republicans just can’t quit him. So even poor Michael Steele, the nominal head of the Republican Party who dared to criticize him, had to grovel and crawl back to the feet of Limbaugh.

Some expected more mettle from Steele. After all, this rare African-American Republican won his post after defeating a candidate who submitted the parody song from Limbaugh’s show: “Barack the Magic Negro.”

Race is an obsession with Limbaugh, one of the threads I noticed on those long drives on country roads.

When Colin Powell endorsed Obama during the campaign, Limbaugh said it was entirely because of race. After the election, Powell said the way for the party, which has been his home, to regain its footing was to say the Republican Party must stop “shouting at the world.”

In 2003, Limbaugh said quarterback Donovan McNabb was overrated because the media wanted a black to succeed. Over the next six years, McNabb threw for nearly 150 touchdowns and went to a Super Bowl.

And Limbaugh launched the current battle when he said of Obama: “We are being told that … we have to bend over, grab the ankles, bend over forward, backward, whichever, because his father was black, because this is the first black president.”

Translation: submit sexually to a black man because “someone” is telling us all to. Who? Which leaders of the Democratic Party have made such a claim? Which opinion-makers? But therein lies the main tactic of Limbaugh, an old demagogue technique: create a straw man, then tear it down. The latest example was Saturday, when Limbaugh presented himself as the defender of capitalism, liberty and unfettered free markets. Obama, he has said since, is waging a “war on capitalism.”

There is a war, all right. We are witnessing the worst debacle of unfettered capitalism in our lifetime brought on by — you got it, capitalism at its worst. It cannibalized itself. Government, sad to say, had nothing to do with it — except for criminal neglect of oversight.

Now that government has been forced to the rescue, just who is insisting on taxpayer bailouts? Who is in line for handouts? Who is saying that only government can save capitalism? The very leaders of unregulated markets who injected this poison into the economy, the very plutocrats that Limbaugh celebrates.

And, of course, let us never forget that the bailouts of banks and insurance companies were initiated by the Republican president Limbaugh defended for eight years.

Of late, Limbaugh has wondered why he has trouble with women. His base is white, male, Republican — people the party has to stop pandering to if it hopes to govern soon.

It’s little wonder that the thrice-married Limbaugh, who uses “femi-Nazi,” “info-babe” and “PMSNBC” (Get it? The network is full of women suffering pre-menstrual cramps, ha-ha), among his monikers for women, can’t get a date with that demographic.

For Democrats, this is all going to plan. It was James Carville and associates who first cooked up associating Limbaugh with the opposition, as Politico reported. Then on Sunday, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel said Limbaugh was the “voice and the intellectual force and energy behind the Republican Party.”

Limbaugh played his role, ever the fool. A brave Republican could have challenged him, could have had a “have you no shame” moment with him, giving the party some other identity, some spine. Instead, they caved — from Steele, to the leaders in the House, Eric Cantor and Mike Pence, to Gov. Bobby Jindal, who would be ridiculed by Limbaugh for his real first name, Piyush, were he a Democrat.

You could almost hear their teeth clattering in fear of the all-powerful talk radio wacko, the denier of global warming, the man who said Bill Clinton’s economic policies would fail just before an unprecedented run of prosperity.

But Limbaugh has a fear of his own. If people see him purely as an “entertainer,” as Steele suggested, he will be exposed for what he is: a clown with a very large audience."

Monday, March 02, 2009

a little movie trivia

All Time Box Office (U.S.)
Rank Title Dist. Cumulative
Gross Release
1 Titanic Paramount Pictures $600,788,188 12/19/1997
2 The Dark Knight Warner Bros. Pictures Distribution $533,213,994 07/18/2008
3 Star Wars 20th Century Fox $460,998,007 05/25/1977
4 Shrek 2 DreamWorks $441,226,247 05/19/2004
5 E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial Universal Pictures $435,110,554 06/11/1982
6 Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace N/A $431,088,301 05/19/1999
7 Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest Buena Vista Pictures Distribution, Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures International $423,315,812 07/07/2006
8 Spider-Man Sony Pictures International, Sony Pictures Releasing $403,706,375 05/03/2002
9 Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith 20th Century Fox $380,270,577 05/19/2005
10 The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King New Line Cinema $377,027,325 12/17/2003
11 Spider-Man 2 Sony Pictures Releasing $373,585,825 06/30/2004