The Bravo Blog

Very interesting take on this whole 9/11 mastermind trial we are promised by our astute Attorney General.  It a Washington Post article, Travesty in New York, written by Charles Krauthammer.  Interesting in the aspect that it outlines the largest contradiction of this administration’s approach to fixing the perceived ills of Guantanamo Bay Camp X-Ray.  You seriously need to read the article to follow my points below, its ok I can wait.

My very own US Senator, Dem. Herb Kohl grilled Holder on the fundamental premise of our judicial system when it came to Mohammed, “What happens if KSM (and his co-defendants) ‘do not get convicted,’ asked Senate Judiciary Committee member Herb Kohl. ‘Failure is not an option,’ replied Holder. ‘Not an option? Doesn't the presumption of innocence, er, presume that prosecutorial failure -- acquittal, hung jury -- is an option?’ Kohl retorted”  Don’t you love it when some old white haired fart slaps you down to Earth with logic and reason?  Krauthammer states that the AG’s presumptions and attitude contradict our own legal systems foundation of presumed innocence.  The guilt was taken from a confession, a confession obtained out of water-boarding, the very thing the Obama administration is wanting to expose and showcase to the world.  My take, its armature hour meets idealism mixed in with an unhealthy dose of naivety and arrogance.  Here is how I back that up.

In America citizens are born with unalienable rights, according to our Constitution, and our government restricted from infringing upon those rights.  These rights, however are not extended to those outside our borders.  We have no say or standing in what citizens of another country do or say, just as we have no standing in what another sovereign nation does or says in regards to their internal matters (I will circle back to this later).  Therefore anyone who commits an act of violence against our citizens is only subjected to the laws of the country from which they reside during the acts committed, this is universally held.  If, however the acts are committed against us as a nation, as in an act of war or terrorism, it falls under established international protocol as that, an act or war for which there is an avenue in place for dealing with, military tribunals.  By trying Mohammed in New York we are granting a foreigner, who was brought here against his will, the same rights, privileges, and courtesies as any American citizen.  Sure, he is not a full citizen with rights to vote, obtain a passport, or keep and bare arms but he does have the protections of our judicial system, now, thanks to the infinite wisdom of out benevolent president and his righteous attorney general.  He has due process, Miranda, fair and speedy trial, and most importantly, no cruel and unusual punishment if convicted.

By having a New York based trial we are extending the courtesies and rights hundreds of thousands of Americans have fought and died for and millions of people across the world have struggled and risked life the limb to obtain through years of hard work and dedication, all with a simple stroke of a pen, and something he never wanted in the first place.  The burden of proof is now in the hands of the prosecuting attorneys.  They have to prove he is guilty of the crimes for which he is to be accused.  What crimes?  He can not be accused of a crime that did not exist prior to that fated day nine years ago.  He can not be accused of waging war on the country as that is not an act for which civil courts are set up to deal with.  We now have to charge him with pre 9/11 crimes, prove beyond a reasonable doubt and excluding circumstantial evidence, he is guilty by a jury of his peers.  There is no evidence to be allowed by the fruit of the poisonous tree, meaning any conversations obtained without his right to legal council, any evidence collected without properly executed warrant, defendant lawyers access to discovery, review, and cross examination to refute and prove its undisputed tie to his client, etc. etc. etc.  You see, civil trials are set up to try people observed, apprehended, and arraigned for crimes committed on American soil by American authorities, under American laws, for which Mohammed did none of.  A trial in New York is just for show and the entire world is fully aware of that pure and simple fact.

Those on the left will state this is a healing process, a way to extend the courtesies and privileges to our enemy they did not extend to us, therefore taking a high-path approach, hogwash!  If this were the case then what about the contradiction Krauthammer exposes in Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri getting sent to military tribunal for his part in the bombing of the USS Cole, on the very same day he sent Mohammed to civil trial in New York?  The article attacks the circular logic without exposing the obvious point, its to your benefit (as a terrorists) to attack civilian targets because you will get a civil trial that is a hundred times harder to get a conviction in and offers a platform to showboat your cause and view your grievances.  Holder sees no problems with military tribunals, he just sees and issue with this one and is using the intended target as a thin vial over the reasons why.  As with all war crime trials since the 1950’s the criminals were accused of targeting innocent civilians.  I guess Holder is conveniently forgetting this or the use of civilian aircraft in the attack exempts Mohammed and his co-defendants from established war crimes precedence.

Holder is claiming all of this is in the name of justice.  If that is the case they why not hold the trial in Los Angeles?  New York is too close to the crime, how can Mohammed get a fair trial in New York?  Where will the perceived justice come in from when finding a jury of his peers?  Who in New York can not remember where and what they were doing at the moments of the attacks?  Its burned into everyone’s minds, permanently.  This is not sounding like justice, its sounding a lot like every kangaroo court trial the US and its allies have railed against for decades.  To be perceived as a fair trial there can be no preconceptions, there is presumed innocent until proven guilty.  How can that be done in New York city?  How can the Attorney General sit down before the world and one second state the reason for the civil trial is to promote fairness and integrity in our laws and the next second state he will get a conviction?  I know attorneys are cocky and full of themselves and their abilities but this is before any trial motions have been filed and the government is stating the guilt before the docket is set.  If anything, and I mean anything, goes wrong in this trial you will see a real disaster, domestically and internationally.  Obama and Holder have painted themselves into a corner and this isn’t quick drying paint.  Everyone knows it is going to be a show trial and we all know what this means.

Lastly, and to bring the item mentioned previously to light.  We have the show of the show trial.  This is going to take years and be drawn out as witnesses are called, cross examined (think beyond New York city here folks), evidence is evaluated, George Bush is put on trial (you know its going to happen), and the enviable preaching by all the co-defendants on why and under what justifications they acted and did what they did.  America’s foreign policy and its perceived interference into international affairs will be placed on trial, 50 plus years of American oppression, imperialism, favoritism, ignorance, fear, and greed will all be used, and with such oratory elegance as to shame all the liberal leaning bleeding heart citizens that the acts were not attacks but reprisals for decades of wrongs and policies that encouraged slavery and poverty so we could prosper and thrive at the expense of others.  This is what the Mohammed’s of the terrorist world want most.  In my anti-terrorists training we were taught why these people take to such acts, what drives, motivates, and sustains their hatred, and it may surprise you what it is.  Its lack of a creditable platform from which to air their grievances. 

Radical Islam is just a tool for the terrorists, its the common thread or foot in the door for them to show commonality and a common foe, a singular manifestation of all that is wrong in their world.  Those pushing terror are doing so to get their message out because there is no venue for them to do so legitimately.  Israel, America’s fault.  The Palestinian condition, America’s fault.  Poverty, hunger, and lack of jobs and services in their home countries, America’s fault.  Radical Islam is just the door.  The leaders, like Mohammad, are eager to get their messages out.  They love publicity and what to get as much of a spot light as possible.  That is why they flew airplanes into buildings, to get our undivided attention so they could talk and we would listen.  Now we are setting the stages, performing the sound checks, selling the tickets, and stocking the concessions for their grandest and most public performance on the world stage.  How, within any degree of righteous or fairness can we think these trial will be seen as anything other then a public show and kangaroo court set up to hand each of these men their punishments after they have the opportunity to spew their hatred and twisted vision of Islam to justify their actions from the largest platform on Earth for all to see?  I for one see no way this will recover American’s reputation or view in world eyes, show trial always do just the opposite.  How are we any better then Myanmar, North Korea, or Iran who all have had show trial with pre-determined verdicts before the trial ever began?  This should have stayed where it belonged, in a military tribunal, with a military sentence, carried out just as those other crimes that even the current administration continues to pursue as the last administration did, USS Cole bombing a shining example.  In an effort to rebuild America’s creditability, something that is only done through actions over decades, not one administrations one term, we have played right into the very avenue our enemy always wanted, a world audience.  Good work team!  Now where is that thar rope, we have us some evil terrorists to hang at the end of this here trial.  Yes, sir.  Its all about fairness in these here parts.  Come back now, you here!

Full article with video found here: Bishop confirms banning Kennedy from receiving Communion | NECN

Patrick Kennedy, the Kennedy family member who has taken over his late father’s senate seat, has found himself in dangerous ground in his stance in the Church.  The Rhode Island Bishop has asked Kennedy to stop taking holy communion due to his support and assistance in getting the current versions of health care reform pushed through.  Actually this thing between Bishop Tobin and Kennedy has been going on since Kennedy and his family used their fame and standing to get the Church to annul his 12 year marriage.  It seems its better late then never.

I am not going to get into the usual angles on this, they are obvious and well covered elsewhere.  What I am going to talk about is the Church, its stance, and its abilities and obligations to its congregation.  Many are stating the Church is out of bounds here, I do not take that view.  I am not a stout Catholic, not even an Easter/Christmas Catholic, just christened and started out in the Catholic Church.  However I am siding with the Church and wish they would go one step further for one simple reason.

The Catholic Church is a private spiritual organization.  As such they have entry rules and teachings that must be learned and adhered to in order to remain a member.  Communion is only taken after you have either been confirmed after passing catechism or the Church has been satisfied in your knowledge and acceptance of Catholicism teachings.  Communion is holy to the Church, its leaders, and its members.  For one high profile member to get a ‘pass’ by betraying one of the fundamental teachings of the Church is hypocritical and close to blasphemy.  Religion should be the rock religious people build their lives upon.  If the Church waffles or shifts the line on something then the congregation and their faith will be lost.

The Church needs to stop trying to gain new members by selling out on some of their teachings or stances.  If you believe abortion is acceptable then you should be excommunicated from the Church, no matter who your family is or what your influence is.  The Church has the ability to maintain its credibility through enforcing its rules on its members as it sees fit.  For too long the Church has wandered from its core beliefs to satisfy the shifting cultural tides of the decade.  Just because teen pregnancy and divorce are accepted and seen as normal in our society does not mean the Church should take a same stance and relax its stance on pre-marital sex and commitments made to the Lord in joining with another human being in life and eternity.  The Church needs to stay consistent, why?  God has not signaled he has changed his mind since the age of prophets has ended.  His word is spiritual law for which we all know the penalty for disobeying.  There are no appeals, leniency based on the age and times in which we live.  Either we follow his path or we don’t, its pretty black and white.  The Church needs to take the same stance and remind us all of this so we can make the decisions needed to life in our modern world the best we can.

The Catholic Church is a long time liberal leaning organization.  Their liberal views do stop at the point where they cross the line with Church doctrine.  Catholics are consistent on this issue.  Abortion to them is wrong, the death penalty to them is wrong, the policies of greed and pitfalls of economic success are wrong to them.  The Catholic Church was the only faction of the Democratic Party who stood in opposition to bringing the KKK into a full fledged part of the DNC, in the 1900’s!  The Church does need to be allowed to enact its rights to preserve its teachings, philosophies, and rules as it sees fit, remember the people who feel the church is no longer for them are free to find any number of more liberal Protestant religions.  You can’t have it both ways, the way Patrick Kennedy is wanting.  You can’t have your pro abortion views for your political career and your religious support for your spiritual career coexist when they are at odds with each other.  If Catholics are such an important part of your voting block and a big part of your life then you must live up to the principles or deal with the consequences.  If Women’s Rights supporters and lobbyists are such an important part of your voting block and your spiritual beliefs are backseat to your religious convictions then its time to quite the Church as God is now second to man in your mind and views.  The Kennedys have long gotten away with too much from the Church and this has been an example of favoritism in the flock for a long time and it needs to stop now.  If the member is not willing to abide by the teachings kick them out.  Sure, you will lose some members but the respect, belief, and integrity of the Church will be strengthened and shown as an example for all to follow.  Our society changes all the time, our religion is not supposed to, unless God makes it known He has changed his mind, last I checked that hasn’t happened since Jesus Christ walked the Earth.  The Church needs to prune these ‘convenient Catholics’ and put its support behind those who and the things that uphold its teachings.  Integrity shines through, as does complacency.

Just over a week ago some truth seeking hackers used a PC in Russia to hack into University of Anglia’s Climate Research servers in the UK.  Unlike past break-in in the news this had nothing to do with identity theft or stolen account information, no, it had to do with finding out what was going on behind the facade of ‘climate change’.  Long time and recent readers will know that I have blogged against global warming and climate change from time to time, about 6 times I believe.  It is not that that I hate environmentalists or the environment, its because I hate hypocrites.

Going to the following link: Google News Search – Climate Change Emails, reveals just 1,370 articles as of Nov 22, 10:50 am EST.  This is sure to change despite the left wing media’s blind eye, the likes of CNN, NY Times, Washington Post and usual suspects have already started to slant the news and spin it toward conspiracy territory.  Well, as is the rule on this blog I wait a fair amount of time before jumping on a story.  Sure I miss out on the first volleys of the debate, but I like to take my time to line up my shots nice and slow before releasing batteries.

This story is going to explode, and I mean EXPLODE.  Sure most of the emails are going to be taken out of context.  Sure there is no smoking gun showing climate change is a hoax or vast left wing conspiracy, but the picture painted sure says a lot about how far the truth was bent and just how clueless the science is behind the theory we are asked to buy into.

The truth has to be exposed and exposed NOW.  If indeed we puny insignificant humans are actually capable in altering the climate of an entire planet we inhabit less then 2% of then we should look at the real science and take actions that the science points to and track its progress until we can reach safe levels.  If we find all this is the baloney and horse pucky I feel 90% of it is then we need to know this and stop the insanity of carbon taxes, credits, emission caps, etc. before we begin to halt technological progress.

California has outlawed incandescent light bulbs, mandated low flow shower heads, toilets, washing machines, etc.  That is great for reducing our impact on the planet but taking away the choices of consumers is not the answer if all we have been preached at for the last 20 years was pure bunk!  California has water problems and changing the light bulbs will prevent them from building another coal fired power plant.  Why not just go with nuclear.  Do they think the population will stay consistent or shrink from today’s levels?  Not with the socialists dream entitlements packages we are passing, it will explode, requiring another plant anyway.  Why outlaw TV’s that suck more power, just raise power costs, the market will then stabilize the issue. 

The truth is not in the emails stolen and posted all over the internet.  The truth is not in the documents stolen and posted over the internet.  But the truth is closer to being exposed as the scientists identified now have to defend their stance at shunning those who disagreed with their finding, that their models were wrong and they fudged the numbers to get what they were assuming was right, the measurements they touted were FALSE, the planet has actually been cooling for almost a decade now, and the list just keeps growing.  The truth, for better or worse, needs to come out as we are really close to passing initiatives that will reverse 200 years of progress and most likely will have little to no impact on the planet’s climate. 

Sure our climate is changing, it always has been for over 5 billion years.  No species ever will be able to change or reverse a planet’s climate in at least another 10,000 years.  All our efforts could be wiped away from 1 mega-volcano’s eruption (Yosemite), pole shift, sun flares, or impact from anything whizzing by our planet too closely.  We can and should clean our our messes, clean our waters, stop relying on dams and let rivers regain some of their natural flows (avoid flooding and produce power when sensible), develop better ways of getting rid of our trash, reduce – reuse – recycle what we can, but cutting carbon emissions by 80% in 15 years is INSANE, it will require all the world to go back to the early 1800’s and reduce the human population by 75%, that is something that is not possible.  Let us re-open the debate on climate change with a fresh set of eyes and stop the talk of urgency and doom we have been hearing for 15 years.  Let us see the REAL data and make educated decisions on what was FOUND and PROVEN.  If it really is that scary we all can take it and deal accordingly, if not, we need to stop the insanity before we end up in caves without toilet paper or deodorant. 

Quite a stir has been made over Obama’s bow since he decided to make a protocol faux pas on both sides of the Pacific.  What needs to be explored is beyond the political speculation and focus needs to go why he did it and what it really means.  Seriously it means little in this modern day, but its symbolic meanings go so far beyond reason it is what is causing a dust up in the press.  As I am here in Asia I can offer some insight and reasons that you won’t find in the American press.

First off lets look at the act.  Obama screwed it all up from the get go.  If you are going to shake the Emperor’s hand, like everyone has done since Japan’s surrender, then you shake his hand.  If you are going to perform a subservient bow then you bow, you never do both at the same time, like Obama did (maybe that is why the Emperor’s wife is laughing so much.  The press made little of Obama’s bow to the Saudi king, but they sure did make a big deal of G.W.’s cheek kiss and hand holding of the same man.  This is just an interesting side bar in this discussion as it does begin to paint a picture of Obama and his lack of protocol.

What I find most comical is the defense of the act by the left and Obama supporters.  Not only is their argument weak, it is contradictory to basic logic when looked at with any depth.  First off, “Obama was just following protocol when meeting the Emperor of Japan”.  FALSE, there are pictures going back to McArthur showing Americans do not bow to the family that initiated the bombing of Pearl Harbor.  “Obama is a global citizen and is sensitive to the customs and politeness of Asia.”  FALSE, #1 else he would have bowed to the Chinese Premiere and President, of course a Chinese bow and not a Japanese bow.  #2 deep bows like Obama did are reserved to servants and subjects of the Emperor as they essentially offer the head of the bower to the Emperor and show how he is their master, not even Obama is willing to call an old tiny Japanese man his master.  #3 if Obama were that worldly, why is he not smoothing the French President and European leaders on the cheek and doing long embraces and arm slaps?  #4 you will never, never, never spite your allies by showing overt favoritism to one over the other, this is a face losing behavior and if Obama ever goes to Thailand, Nepal, Cambodia and does not do the same he is a hypocrite and slapping them all the face as a clear preference to Japan has been established.  Finally, as earlier stated, you either bow or shake hands, never both.  Even Chinese people who don’t really care about bowing anymore see this as a joke and can’t believe anyone would be that silly.

Next lets look at the impact of this back home in America.  Obama is still seeing his popularity stay steady but his job approval scores continue to go down.  The press is slowly starting to accept the fact he can be criticized without coming off as being racist.  His humility tour where he continues to down play America over other nations is beginning to wear thin.  The largest hit against Obama to me on this is the before mentioned bow of subservience and bowing to the family that launched us into WWII by bombing our ships in harbor unprovoked.  Now I understand there is protocol to be followed when aboard, much like his wife’s infamous back touch to the British Queen, but why is Obama going against 60 years of protocol now and to Japan and not to European countries?  Would he kneel to the King of Spain?  How about to the Pope, would he act in reverent of his holiness or stand tall and statue like when meeting a Christian leader? 

Realistically this means little.  McArthur let Japan keep their Emperor, just with no powers of state duties, under the terms of surrender.  Bowing to him is showing respect but he is not accustomed to this from state visits.  You will never see a Chinese bow to him, ever and many Asians would never bow either given Japan’s past transgressions during the war.  This was more of a publicity stunt or a pure slip up as something that seemed good at the time.  Not even Clinton bowed to him during a visit to the White House, the State Dept quickly stopped him when he tried because they knew it was not normal protocol.  The bow will not result in any special treaties, investments in US bonds, monetary favors, trade favoritisms, etc.  All it will net from the Japanese is cute headlines and some good will among those born before 1941.  Here in America is will incite head scratching, detractions from his political enemies, apologies galore from his allies and praise from his fanatics.

The real issue here is the goals and end game Obama is working on in international relations.  His humility tour will only work for as long as he and this current congress are in power.  If he is not re-elected or a potential backlash in 2010 occurs against the congress then the reality of our international relations will change.  Just as they changed between Nixon/Ford and Carter, Carter and Regan, Regan and Bush, Bush and Clinton, Clinton and Bush, and so on.  All this work of re-booting relations will end with him or a new congress which grants him authority to trade relations.  If America gets tired of Obama over the next 3 years we could end up with another cowboy who would do his thing his way and not care about international relations, or we could get a protectionist president who closed down the country to the rest of the world.  His humility tour is more personal then it is national.  Sure he represents us and speaks for us, but he does not hold the convictions of the American people.  His grounding in not in the mainstream status quo, part of why he got elected, but in an ideal that has been peculating for 60 years.  Obama is an ideal, a representation, a slogan in a suit.  He speaks eloquently, when his teleprompter is working, and people get the sense he is talking to them.  His words are just vague and specific enough to capture the imagination and speak to the idealist in all of us.  His bow and the meaning behind it has more to do with him then anything else, just like his election and running of the country.  To him this is all very very very personal, and that is why he is out there doing what he is doing.  He is not doing this for America, he is doing this to say, ‘hey look at me, I represent something I despised before and now I am going to fix it and make it all better.  Too bad he is forgetting about we, the people, who elected him and for whom he speaks.  We the people are the ones who have to be convinced on the best ways to fix what is wrong with our nation.  The election might have been about him, the rest is all about us, even us right wing conservatives who are perceived as terrorists by those who see the same goal from a different angle.

I have had a couple of ideas rattling around in my head for a month or so now and finally have some time to get at least one out.  As I came of age in the 1980’s I have a unique view on art and culture as I experienced the largest cultural shift in music, television, and movies in American history.  After the 1980’s we saw our entertainment industry shift toward more and more commercial interests.  Yes, I know that all art is commercial and Hollywood has been commercial for a long time but it became a driving force over all others in the 1990’s.  Since then then the quality and substance of music, movies, and TV entertainment have continued to plunge to new lows each 5 years or so.

First off, lets look at music, my former favorite.  In the 1970’s music was largely segmented across racial, cultural, and sub-cultural barriers.  R&B was rhythm and blues, Jazz was jazz, Country and Western was country, Folk was folk, Disco was disco, Rock was rock and Pop was the top 40 or top 100 selling singles for the week.  You could tell the difference between Kenny Rogers, Aerosmith, Boston, Chicago, Stevie Wonder, and Louis Armstrong without any thought.  Music was tailored for its base consumer base and innovation was in the air as new electronic recording and production capabilities were introduced.  In the 1980’s the movements within each genre started to split into smaller sub-groups, rap, soul, acid jazz, bluegrass, hard rock, heavy metal, glam, dance, etc. started emerging and specializing while pushing innovation and selling albums hand over fist.  The lines started blurring and it was harder to tell the difference between Lionel Rickie and Lisa Lisa and Cult Jam or Van Halen and Loverboy or Randy Travis and Garth Brooks or LL Cool J and Ice T yet it was easy to tell the differences between the major groups.  This is where the beginning of the end came in.

In the 1990’s the music industry had reached a climax.  All the creativity was creating more artists and sounds then the industry could handle.  The money being made forced the industry to make a decision that killed music for the fans, copying.  In stead of trying to find the next big sound or next big segment of the music world the recording industry wanted to find the next Nirvana, NWA, Metallica, Whitney Houston, New Kids on the Block, Clint Black, etc.  They went for formulization that raised a generation of copy cats instead of innovators as the previous generation was.  Don’t believe me, who was the Eddie Van Halen of the 1990’s?  All the sub groups started to sound alike to the point you couldn’t really tell if you were listening to Sponge, Bush, Silverchair, or Radiohead.  Pop and Rock were merged as were R&B, Soul, and Rap.  New innovators like alternative and techno were just lumped into the larger groups.  Talk in the industry went from “where is the next place the new sound will come from?” to “who do they sound like?”.  From here the talents were shifted to mocking and not innovating.  Now I realize that there was innovation and new groups coming out, but not at the rate you saw in the previous decade.  The turn of the century just saw more of the same, copy cats and imitators of successful groups being milled out as quickly as the industry could find them.  All of this was on the backdrop of the peer to peer downloading which trumped the news that record sales had been falling for years, just now at an alarming rate.  The industry blamed the college kids, but the industry was no longer putting out quality product worth dropping any cash on.

Next is TV.  In the 70’s TV was tame.  The industry was in transition as commercials were being regulated, smoking and alcohol were now out, and the industry was starting to use more psychologically based aids.  I can remember watching movies on TV with only 4 commercials, try that today, even on cable!  Programs were cheaply produced and the themes were often mundane and predictable.  Hits were something special and people would plan their weeks around favorite shows, like Dukes of Hazzard, Rockford Files, Kojak, etc.  TV programming was not much different then in the 1960’s and competition was light, thanks to just 3 networks and only major cities having VHF.  The 1980’s saw TV explode with larger budgets, edgier scripts, and new and interesting programming that captivated the nation.  Dallas, Hill Street Blues, St Elsewhere, LA Law, Miami Vice, Family Ties, etc.  They all started to incorporate movie style budgets, cutting edge topics, pushing the lines of decency and challenging the national attitudes on social topics of the day.  People planned their weeks around their favorite shows.  The advent of the VCR allowed people to start taping the shows they had to miss or could not watch because of a competing program of equal quality. 

TV continued to grow and mature in the 1990s as cable saturation gave more variety to more people as its prices became more affordable and programming expand beyond movie channels and shopping channels.  The industry saw the likes of movie directors lending a hand to writing and big name stars appear along side emerging stars.  Commercials began using popular music instead of jingles and industry standbys of the days before.  Programs were becoming more popular and attracting the money that follows.  Stars were born overnight and their influence began to sway corporate executives, sometimes to disastrous results.  Still, the shows were new and fresh, but by the middle of the decade they started to follow the music industry model, copy the successful ones and formulate everything.  Even successful shows of the time, Law and Order, ER, etc. formulated their own past successes to become predictable and boring, only the actors were changing.  By the turn of the century the only innovation was on cable and only by networks like HBO that dared to push the lines of cultural acceptance with previous taboo subject matter and nudity not allowed on networks, Sex and the City, 6 Foot Under, The Sapranos.  Now we see the same things being imitated over and over, just now they are old and stale.

Movies have gone the same route.  In the 70’s themes were small, budgets not so big, and themes not too shocking.  This was changed by 2 genres, horror and sci-fi.  With the likes of Exorcist, Halloween, and Star Wars, Close Encounters the industry changed and changed overnight.  Suddenly special effects and simple story lines took over.  Movies shifted into fun events and escapes from the issues of the day.  The 1980’s continued and added the big budget blockbusters with India Jones and the introduction of serials, suddenly everything got a sequel.  This was different then the sequels of the past that were more like separate movies instead of familar characters doing familiar things.  The 1990’s took the success of the past decade and merged it with the TV model of the day.  Edgy, dark, and themes pushing social views came to the center.  Serial killers and anti-heroes were the order of the decade and they filled it with glee.  At the turn of the century it all started to turn in on itself.  Kids movies were so formulated that kids were becoming board half way through, until smart writers stepped in and added adult content, truing the focus of the movies into how many clever ways to conceal adult material.  Disaster movies, Thrillers, Mysteries, and the old mainstays Action, Horror and Sci-Fi became all carbon copies of the successes of the first part of the decade.  See the pattern here?

This has started to change, but change for the worse.  How?  The writers, producers, and creative minds behind music, tv, and movies have been copying the successes of the past for so long now that they are no longer able to create anything new.  Sure some try only to get lost half way through it.  Take Lost for example.  It started out like the Matrix, something new, fresh, and daring, only to fall flat on the creativity side and end up a mashed up compilation of tired old themes and sub-plots.  Even Axl Rose sounds like Guns and Roses after taking 15 years to produce an album that is well, just like you would expect from him.  We see things the entertainment industry trying to re-do all the successes of the past now.  Movies are the worst here.  Remakes that only try to update the feel of the originals or take a new yet tired twist of the original, like Halloween, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and less flattering remakes.  Now we have music artists releasing albums of there favorite songs from the 1980’s, that was just 20 years ago!  While it is hard to be unique, edgy, daring, and fresh it seems nobody is trying.  Just as groups like Linkin Park think they are original anyone who listened to Stabbing Westward will see stark similarities.  I even saw Cuba Gooding Jr. AND Christian Slater in a horrible film, Lies and Illusions that begs me to ask what were their agents thinking.  TV is so bad that it is mostly reality programs, the rebirth of the verity show like Jay Lenno’s disaster.  This begs me to ask, where did all the creativity go?  Why is it that the best entertainment found is in sporadic spurts that fade as quickly as they emerge, like the movie District 9 or hard rock metal group Union Underground? 

I know it is not just my age and jaded nature or cynicism as others have mentioned this to me before.  The last movie I really felt fun watching was just a montage of 1970’s kung fu flicks, Kill Bill vol 1, vol 2 sucked.  I gave up on music long before I moved to China.  Since moving here I have been catching up on TV and movies quickly as DVDs here are dirt cheap and over the years the quality has constantly declined.  While I know that this is not the case for 100% of the things in entertainment, where is the creativity that used to make us forget our daily slog?  Where is the excitement that used to grab us and make us plan our lives around, like TV shows, album releases, opening weekends of movies?  Most of the big movies of the past 5 years were either re-makes or aging series started a decade or so before, Star Wars, Indian Jones.  From where I am sitting it is all going down hill and I don’t know why.  People in entertainment are getting paid more and have better benefits then they did before yet their productivity, creativity, and innovation is all well below where it was just 15 years before.  Why is this?  Do we really have to make artists suffer to get anything good from them?  Could it be that our human condition is only improved through struggle and adversity?  Is it possible that when we are happy, secure, and confident on our professions and futures we stop striving, reaching, and taking the risks that inspire millions?  I think we have all gotten so complacent that we just accept what is handed to us and quality is less then a concept to most of us now.  I guess we should just go back to reading books and telling stories around campfires for entertainment, those were always entertaining and fresh then what we are being sold today.