Here is an interesting article from http://www.debbieschlussel.com/ reviewing some of the movies that came out over the past weekend. This follows this post about some of the movies from last week and THIS POST about some movies that have been released over the past few years that you might have missed! This all follows this post about guidelines to choosing good movies to watch yourself!

Weekend Box Office: Sully, Our Little Sister

By Debbie Schlussel
Even though it’s now September, I feel like I’m still stuck in the August pet cemetery of movies, where Hollywood sends crappy movies to die a quick and painless death. Sad to say, that applies to both of the new movies in theaters today (go see the excellent “Hell or High Water” instead–I’ll try to post a review later today). Neither “The Disappointments Room” nor “When the Bough Breaks” were screened for critics (a sure sign that they’re stinkers).

* Sully – Rated PG-13: This movie’s been getting a lot of buzz, promotion, and Oscar talk. Don’t believe the hype. It’s a nothing and a big fat lie. The “Miracle on the Hudson” has been transformed in a reverse-Rumpelstiltskin to Bullcrap on the Silver Screen, complete with totally made-up villains who never existed and make-believe drama that never happened. The Brothers Grimm ain’t got nothin’ on this fairy tale.
I wondered how they were going to make a movie about something that’s a short, cut-and-dried event in real life: a pilot, Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger (here played by a mustachioed Tom Hanks) masterfully lands a plane in the Hudson River, after both engines of the plane are blown out by birds. Miraculously, everyone on board survives. End of story. At least . . . that was the end of the real, true-life story, which is at best a 20-minute movie. Director Clint Eastwood needed drama and something with which to fill this slow, mundane storyline so it lasts another hour and some change. So what did he do? He and scriptwriter Todd Komarnicki bring us a completely fabricated, phony story in which the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is a villainous group of the usual stock Hollywood baddies: fat, old, bald White men (and one White chick) who constantly second-guess and chastise Sully for not returning the plane to the airport or landing at another one nearby. That’s more than half of the movie. (By the way, since Blacks are clamoring for more roles in movies, why didn’t they cast any Black people as the frowning, indignant, moralizing NTSB villains? Don’t Black actor’s lives matter? Just askin’.)
But, in fact, NONE of that ever happened, as well-documented in a Bloomberg News story. Yes, there was the usual, typical NTSB investigation–as there has been, is, and would be in the case of any such emergency landing in a river. But, in real life, it was a formality, and the NTSB never attacked or criticized Sullenberger’s water landing as is depicted throughout this hour-and-thirty-five-minute-long movie. In fact, the NTSB officials praised Sully for his landing, and he praised them in “his” book, “Highest Duty: My Search for What Really Matters,” on which this movie is supposed to be based (but barely is). [Full disclosure: the late Detroit-based journalist and best-selling author, Jeff Zaslow (a Wall Street Journal reporter)–the actual author of the Sully book (he gets co-author credit but actually wrote the whole thing)–was a friend of mine, a reader of this site, and a mensch who comforted me when my late dad was dying of cancer. We spoke about Sully and the book several times in writing and over the phone (including about the Sully sex stuff, below, which he found out about from my site). Sully spoke at his funeral. Zaslow wrote an article about me in the Wall Street Journal that I hated, but my dad loved it.]
The fact that the movie is a complete lie and defames the NTSB officials doesn’t seem to phase Sully. Apparently, Sully likes to sully others. He not only appears in the movie during the ending credits, but he is pimping the movie all over the place because he profits from it–he sold the rights to his book for this endeavor. Cha-ching! And that makes him a lot less of a “hero” than America originally gave him credit for. He was already something of a jerk in my eyes because, as I pointed out on this site, he and his wife appeared on NBC’s “Today” show to tell the world about their “rock star” sex-life after the landing on the Hudson. Um, TOO. MUCH. INFORMATION!
Yeah, this whole thing went to greedy fame-whore Sully’s head. And that’s why he probably can live with this over-hyped, hyperbolic “version” of what happened, when it is just total fiction, and he’s admitted as much on at least one TV interview I saw when asked about the NTSB dust-up and whether it really happened. But, then, he and Clint Eastwood also pimp the phony version told in this movie in a promotional video trailer they recently made. By the way, after the Hudson landing, Sully quickly quit piloting the friendly skies to become yet another motivational speaker (because America has a shortage of those and needs more!).
I hate this kind of movie because we know that morons across America will believe that the BS they see on screen is reality a la Oliver Stone’s “JFK.”
On top of this, to create more drama and–frankly–filler, the movie shows several “nightmares” Sully has of crashing his plane into buildings a la the 9/11 attacks, which is tone-deaf, given that the movie opens just two days before the 15th anniversary of those attacks. There’s also a nightmare in which he dreams that Katie Couric attacks him for landing in the Hudson. This is absurd, and I highly doubt any of that ever happened either. There are at least three of these dumb “imaginations.”
On top of that, the movie is filled with the mundanity of the heroic pilot’s post-Hudson-landing life. Do you find it exciting to see an old guy in a mustache, jogging? Then, this is your movie, as there are several scenes of that. Or how about an airline official bringing Sully a change of clothes, including socks, undies, and a sweatshirt? Wow, exciting. Only a vacuous movie needs these empty calories to fill time and space. And, then, there are the several tear-filled, overwrought phone conversations with Sully’s wife (in real life, she’s the “I’m having rock-star sex with Sully, America!” chick). He tells her he can’t fly again or come home until the NTSB investigation by the evil guys is over. Again, THAT. NEVER. HAPPENED.
Then, there are the weird scenes in which a TV makeup artist kisses Sully and a hotel manager hugs him. Did these things happen? I don’t know or care. Cuz’ I found this boring as heck, even with the casting of Aaron Eckhart (whom I normally like) as Sully’s also-mustachioed co-pilot. His presence in the movie seems like a forced bro-mance . . . and for him to utter F-bombs (and maybe to have a fellow member in the Mustache Hair Club for Men–is he not only a member, but also the president?).
The only exciting part of the movie is the depiction of what actually happened when the plane flew, collided with birds, had its emergency landing on the Hudson, and then the passengers got rescued. That showed the best in Sully and the best in America–including 1,200 (according to the movie) first-responders and others who rescued everyone. But it is so sullied (“Sully-ed”?) with flashbacks and flash-forwards that it’s a choppy, herky-jerky mess.
We already know the real story. Why pay and waste time to watch the underwhelming lie-filled version?
Time for Clint Eastwood to retire . . . along with his prevaricating scriptwriter.
I’m glad the 155 passengers and crew landed safely and lived. Sadly, I’m not happy that this fraud-on-film will also have a safe landing. With all the undeserved hype it’s getting on TV and in pop culture, it’s sure to top the box office this weekend.
But it deserves to crash and burn.
TWO MARXES PLUS THREE PANTS ON FIRE



* Our Little Sister [Umimachi Diary]– Rated PG: I’ve seen some really great, moving Japanese movies (such as “Departures”–read my review). This was not one of them. I found this movie to be slow, boring, and utterly pointless. Like what befell Hiroshima and Nagasaki, this too is an atomic bomb. (What–too soon?) I guess if you have more than two hours of your life to waste and absolutely nothing to do whatsoever (plus you’ve already seen every other movie and other source of entertainment ever made), this would be okay. I struggled to stay awake, waiting for a little something to happen that never did. And, again, it’s more than two hours long. Yaaaawn.
The story: three 20-something Japanese sisters go to their estranged father’s funeral in the country. He left them decades ago after cheating on their mother, and they have little connection to him. Their mother, who is still alive, also left them, after their father’s cheating and leaving, and they live together in their mother’s former house in the city.
When they go to the funeral, the the girls meet their younger, teen-aged half-sister, who is the product of the union of their father’s affair and then marriage to the woman that broke up the three sister’s parents marriage. The woman has since died, and their father is now married to wife number three
(who has a baby with him and a boy from a previous marriage). Yeah, I know, it sounds like a soap opera, a dysfunctional family, or merely a start in your typical, normal NBA player’s set of extended family and baby-mamas.
The three older sisters invite their younger half-sister to come live with them, as–with the death of their father–she now has no one.
The rest of the movie shows us the three sisters’ humdrum lives, and it’s hard to keep track of them because at least two of them look very alike. Yeah, I know, that sounds “RAAAAAYCIST!” But, sorry, they look as alike as actresses Sally Struthers and Jacki Weaver do (and they’re White). Not that I cared about these sisters. You learn nothing about them, and they’re boring. One works at a bank, another works at a hospital (apparently as a nurse), and another works at a sporting goods store. One sister is having an affair with a married man who won’t leave his wife for her but wants her to move to Boston with him, and another sister quickly goes through boyfriends. The young half-sister plays soccer at her new school and has a boyfriend. Then, the movie–running out of boring things to tell us about these sisters, starts introducing us to other boring and melancholy characters, including a woman who owns a diner, but is dying of cancer.
And the purpose of this movie is . . . I’m not sure. But it’s useless to me, and will be to you. Nothing offensive about it. But nothing worthwhile about it either.
A total waste of time.
ONE MARX

Here is an interesting article from http://www.debbieschlussel.com/ reviewing some of the movies that came out over the past weekend. This follows this post about some of the movies from last week and THIS POST about some movies that have been released over the past few years that you might have missed! This all follows this post about guidelines to choosing good movies to watch yourself!

Wknd Box Office: Bridge of Spies, Steve Jobs, Goosebumps, Crimson Peak

By Debbie Schlussel


Of the new movies debuting in theaters today, the best of the bunch is a scary movie aimed at kids.
* “Bridge of Spies“: I didn’t like this movie for several reasons, primary among them the belittling of the dangerous conduct of a Soviet spy, the softening of Soviet human rights abuses, and the blatant moral equivalency of the U.S. and the Soviets portrayed in this film from the first frame. The movie begins with an onscreen statement of moral equivalency between the United States and the Soviet Union. And we were never equal. The statement says that during the height of the Cold War, the United States was afraid of the Soviet Union, and the Soviet Union was afraid of the U.S. It goes on to say that each country was fearful that the other was going to acquire and use nuclear weapons. You see, in the world of Steven Spielberg (who directed and made this movie happen), the Soviets were “just like us.” I guess he forgot that his own grandparents left Russia, where they were confronted by intense anti-Semitism.
The movie makes little to no mention of the legion Soviet human rights abuses, but for one scene showing the shooting of East Germans trying to climb over the wall separating them from West Germany and a later scene showing American kids easily climbing over walls with nothing happening to them. That is the extent of the “moral high ground” of America versus the Soviets as expressed in this movie.
As I’ve noted in the past, including in my late father’s eulogy, my late father, H.L. Schlussel, MD, an ophthalmologist was connected with a family of colleagues in the Soviet Union in the late ’70s, the Poltinnikovs. Dr. Isaac Poltinnokov and his wife and daughter, all three of them ophthalmologists, were fired from their jobs, after they applied for visas to go to Israel. Thereafter, they were forbidden by the Soviet State to have jobs, and they had no money for food, housing, and heat, in the bitter, bleak cold of Siberia. They were also not allowed to accept money from donors–this was outlawed as “parasitism” by the Soviet State–so they were unable to pay for these things. My late father, Of Blessed Memory, created fake medical situations of the eye, wrote them down, sent them to Dr. Poltinnikov, and paid him for his “consultations” on these fake cases. Dr. Poltinnikov finally got to go to Israel, but alone. His wife and daughter died–one of them committing suicide after non-stop KGB harassment of them, and the other dying of starvation out of fear the KGB was poisoning their food. Nothing like this or any other Soviet horrors was shown in this movie. Not even close. Again, they are “just like us,” in the world according to Spielberg.
Also missing from this movie is any mention whatsoever of Soviet spy Rudolf Invanovich Abel’s involvement in the enemy spy ring passing U.S. atomic secrets to the Soviets. Yes, he was tied to the operation that involved the Rosenbergs, who were executed for treason, as Rudolf Abel should have been. But none of Abel’s activities here are mentioned in the movie. In fact, his trial is quickly skipped over, as well as his appeal. What we are primarily shown is the trumped up “heroics” of James B. Donovan, a liberal Democrat insurance lawyer (Tom Hanks), who once assisted in prosecutions of Nazis at the Nuremberg Trials and is pressed into service to represent Abel in his federal trial. Donovan loses the trial but successfully gets the judge to sentence Abel to life in prison instead of death. Then, Donovan decides to pursue an appeal to the Supreme Court on Abel’s behalf and loses, but not before his law firm, the police, and average American citizens are attacking him and his house and telling him he’s the most hated man in America. Many of the actions in the movie are meant to invoke current images of Islamic terrorists and their lawyers (Spielberg said so in interviews), with us evil, unsophisticated, bigoted Americans in the wrong for opposing Islamic terrorists and their lawyers’ tactics in court. By the way, Abel is the nicest, most fabulous guy in this movie. Because, hey, all Soviet spies stealing our nuclear technology were the most classy of people, right?
This movie is long, slow, and boring at nearly 2.5 hours. When it finally starts moving, the movie is already halfway through, and that’s when we get to Donovan’s secret trip to East Germany to negotiate a trade of Abel in exchange for Francis Gary Powers, an American pilot who was shot down over Russia. Donovan also wants the release of an American grad student who was studying economics in East Germany and was captured by the East Germans. But the CIA position is that the trade is one for one because the agency doesn’t want to jeopardize the pilot’s freedom for a student who knowingly and willingly did the idiotic thing to go and study among the Soviet-backed East German Communists. That’s a position I agree with, but, of course, those of us who don’t want to rescue Americans that do dumb things and visit enemy countries (and then get captured) are “extremist,” “intolerant,” and “unAmerican.” And that’s how the CIA is portrayed here. Oh, and by the way, typical of Hollywood, all the drama of the negotiations for the prisoner exchange are trumped up from what really happened–you know, in order to make the movie “exciting.”
While the movie makes Donovan out to be some sort of great hero, it doesn’t tell you that he had the chance to kill Fidel Castro by giving him a poison-laden diving suit, but declined and foiled the operation by giving his own suit to the human rights abusing dictator. The movie does mention in a post-script that Donovan was enlisted by the CIA and the federal government to negotiate on behalf of the Bay of Pigs families.
Yes, the movie is beautifully shot and chock full of dramatic orchestral music–and, yes, it recognizes a largely unsung man in contemporary U.S. history. But it’s a slog. I struggled to stay awake in the slow first half (and briefly lost the battle, missing nothing). And I can’t recommend a movie that, for the most part, makes us out to be morally equivalent to the brutal, totalitarian Soviet dictatorship . . . and makes their spies out to be swell guys.
Sorry.
TWO MARXES PLUS TWO OBAMAS

Watch the trailer . . .

* “Steve Jobs“: The other day, while waiting for an associate at Chase Bank to help me, I had nothing to read but the thick volume on the bank’s history. It was so dry, uninteresting, and snooze-inducing that I quickly closed the book and stopped that pointless exercise. Unfortunately, sitting through this movie, I felt like I was kidnapped and held hostage by the corporate biography of Chase again, but the word, “Apple,” and the name, “Steve Jobs,” were inserted instead. I don’t know how they managed to make the life of an exciting and inspirational corporate genius and idea man like Jobs into a snoozer, but they did. What was just over two hours seemed like more than three. The movie is too much “inside baseball” stuff, concentrating on corporate minutiae nobody really cares about. Do you really care about who voted for what at which board meeting and then had to leave the fancy lounge at the airport to save his job? Yaaawn.
The filmmakers bought the rights to the Walter Isaacson-penned book on Jobs, and it’s hard to believe that out of that vastly interesting read, the filmmakers focused only on what a jerk Jobs was to his employees and his illegit daughter and babymama. Yes, I know he initially denied paternity and didn’t handle it in the most fatherly and responsible way, but did I need to be hammered over the head with “Steve Jobs is a jerky sperm donor!” two-by-four for nearly the entire movie? There was much more to this guy, and all we saw was that he was an awful person, a bad father, and a whiny b-tch. It was very one-sided. And it takes place only on three separate days of Jobs’ career in computers. That’s it. Just three days. It doesn’t give a picture of anything. But, when Jobs died, there was too much adulation–it was way over the top–and now the pendulum is swinging back in the other direction.
Making things even worse was the casting of Jobs. Irish/German actor Michael Fassbender’s accent constantly reared its head, while Jobs was born here and had a markedly American accent. On top of that, Fassbender looks nothing like Jobs until the last third of the movie, which takes place in Jobs’ black mock turtleneck era. So, it just wasn’t believable. And the filmmakers, as well as Jobs’ former friend and partner, Steve Wozniak, admit that they made up much of the dialogue and scenes in the movie.
I never thought I’d say this, but the hokey Ashton Kutcher Steve Jobs movie (read my review) was far, far better and looks like a masterpiece compared to this. This had no plot and just slogged along. The dialogue was way too overwrought, and the movie just wasn’t interesting.
The only person I thought stood out in this movie was Kate Winslet as Joanna Hoffman, who, according to this movie, was Jobs “right-hand man” throughout his corporate career. I thought she did a good job with the Polish immigrant accent. And that’s the best I can say for this bore.
Don’t believe the hype. This movie doesn’t live up to even a tiny fraction of it.
ONE MARX

Watch the trailer . . .

* “Goosebumps“: I really enjoyed this movie, and it’s the relative best of the new offerings at theaters, today. But I was surprised that this was aimed at kids, since it’s kind of scary (although the real-life author portrayed in the movie does write semi-scary kids books). I know, I know–kids aren’t allowed to have a childhood anymore. But, for example, in one scene in this movie, a bunch of garden gnomes are trying to drag author R.L. Stine into a burning oven to kill him. It’s fine for teens, though. The movie is very funny, fast-paced, and, for the most part, tightly written. It’s also, as I mentioned, somewhat scary.
The story: Jack Black plays real life author R. L. Stine, one of the most successful authors of kids books (and books of any kind for that matter). In real life, he reportedly makes over $40 million per year and has sold several hundred million books, including the “Goosebumps” series depicted in the movie.
The story: Zach (Dylan Minnette), whose father has died, moves with his high school principal mother to the small town of Madison, Delaware, where his mother now heads the high school. Zach discovers Hannah (Odeya Rush, who resembles a younger Mila Kunis), a cute girl living next door . . . and her mysterious, weirdo father (Black). The dad forbids Hannah from having anything to do with Zach. But kids will be kids, and the two ignore her father’s advice and become fast friends. One night, Zach thinks he hears the father attacking Hannah, and he calls the police. Then, he sneaks into Hannah’s house and opens some locked manuscripts of Goosebumps books, releasing the monsters in the stories onto the earth and causing havoc. One of those monsters is a ventriloquist dummy villain, who opens all of the rest of the books, releasing all of the monsters, causing a major disaster, as the monsters will destroy the town and probably the world. Zach learns that the father is really author R.L. Stine, and together, they try to save the town.
There are some really funny lines (especially the R.L. Stine/Steven King “feud” stuff), and it’s a cute movie. Not a masterpiece, and the way it was “all tied up” at the end was too convenient. But, overall, it’s a nice escapist movie for the younger set, which I also enjoyed.
I saw this in 2D, and it was just fine. So you don’t need to spring for the 3D version.
TWO REAGANS

Watch the trailer . . .

* “Crimson Peak“: I hated this movie. Another long, slow, boring trudge through ground that has been broken, rehashed, and re-vomited a million times, including the dumb, vile brother-sister incest thing. Um, old news. I feel like I’ve seen this plot over and over again. And the “scary” monsters–CGI black skeletons–weren’t scary at all. They were amateurish CGI and just laughable. On top of that, it’s just a dreadful, bleak waste of time.
The story: it’s the late 1800s, and a mysterious Englishman, Sir Thomas Sharpe (Tom Hiddleston), is in America, trying to get money from rich people to invest in his clay-digging machine. While in the process of seeking investors, Thomas romances Edith (Mia Wasikowska), the young daughter of a wealthy widower whose investment he is seeking. Then, he announces his quick engagement to her. The father sees Thomas and his raven-haired sister, Lucille (Jessica Chastain), as con artists, and he pays them off to break his daughter’s heart and leave town. But they kill the father, and soon Edith is married to the man. Then, she moves to England to the brother’s and sister’s creepy rural castle. The castle is a dump with rot everywhere, blood red soil leaking out of the floorboards, and a giant hole in the ceiling in the dead of winter. But love is blind, and Edith looks the other way, embracing the dumpy castle, despite its filth, very evident creepiness, and other unlivable maladies.
Meanwhile, it turns out that the siblings are not only just as bad as Edith’s father believed they were, they are worse. A doctor (Charlie Hunnam), from Edith’s hometown in America, loves her and researches just who Edith’s new “relations” are, along with the help of a suspicious family attorney.
In the meantime, Edith lives and wanders the creepy castle and, despite encountering many guests, having a lot of bad dreams, and discovering pools of blood read sludge in giant vats in the basement, it takes her a while to suspect that something is very wrong. Yes, you could have seen this coming, along with everything else in this movie. It’s very predictable, derivative, repetitive, slow-moving, and just poorly done. It’s a mess.
Since it’s a period piece, a lot of attention to superficial detail has been paid. The costumes are beautiful, and the bleak, deserted environment is stark. You feel all of it and more. It’s just that the story doesn’t deserve it. It’s just that bad. And that seems to be the case in a lot of movies these days: gorgeous sets, costumes, and cinematography, but the plot: quite ugly.
And like many of these movies, this one is all style, with zero substance of note.
Skip this.
THREE MARXES PLUS AN ISIS BEHEADING

Watch the trailer . . .

A timely post about from www.vdare.com about the GOP and the Confederate Flag. This follows this post about Pope Francis turning LEFT. This follows this post about Conservative Black Issues Speakers who are needed now more than ever! This follows this post about Obamacare subsidies and the Supreme Court.
You can follow me here.

Stupid Party Behaving, Well, Stupidly, Over Confederate Battle Flag, Council Of Conservative Citizens

>

---

Alexander Hart
                                                      

South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley’s sudden capitulation on the Confederate Battle Flag was entirely predictable given the terminally corrupt South Carolina GOP [South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley says Confederate flag has ‘no place’ on statehouse ground, Fox News, June 22 2015]. But as Conservatism Inc. and the GOP blindly attempt to distance themselves from Southern history, they are digging their own graves. Their joining in the rush to demonize the Council of Conservative Citizens is just another example. There was a reason the late Sam Francis, himself once editor of the Council’s newsletter, described the GOP as “the Stupid Party.”
The Charleston shooter Dylann Roof’s supposed manifesto noted that he Googled “black on white crime,” found the Council of Conservative Citizens website and discovered that there was an enormous amount of black on white crime that the Main Stream Media just suppresses. This is the extent of any known connection between Roof and the organization.
After the shooting, the Council’s blog stated: “the loss of nine lives is devastating” and “we pray, for the sake of all Americans, that there will not be an escalation of racial tension.”
The organization’s president Earl Holt III further noted:

The CofCC does not advocate illegal activities of any kind, and never has. I would gladly compare the honesty and law-abiding nature of our membership against that of any other group.
[Media Interviews with the CofCC, Conservative-Headlines.com, June 20, 2015]

In all the condemnations of the Council in the wake of the shooting, I have not seen anyone suggest that Roof was actually a member, or that the organization has advocated violence. And insofar as the Council highlighted black on white crime, it is no different than most other conservative news outlets like Drudge Report, Breitbart, Fox News, and Daily Caller.
In fact, many Leftists quickly blamed these conservative outlets as well.
For example, South Carolina House Minority Leader Todd Rutherford (pictured right) attacked Fox News saying Roof:

…hears that, because he watches the news and he watches things like Fox News, where they talk about things that they call news, but they’re really not. They use that coded language, they use hate speech, they talk about the president as if he’s not the president. They talk about churchgoers as if they’re not really churchgoers. And that’s what this young man acted on. That’s why you can walk into a church and treat people like animals when they’re really human beings. [South Carolina legislator took a cheap-shot at Fox News on Charleston massacre, By Erik Wemple, Washington Post, June 20, 2015]

Similarly, Bill Maher noted “there were a lot of stories about black people” on Drudge and Daily Caller, which “present a really twisted view,” so he was “not surprised this guy thought ‘they’re taking over the country.” [Bill Maher Says Daily Caller, Matt Drudge, Fox News Inspired Dylann Roof [VIDEO], By Chuck Ross, Daily Caller, June 20, 2015] (In 2011, when Drudge merely linked to headlines about the Flash Mob phenomenon without mentioning race, Salon’s Alex Pareene called it Matt Drudge’s disgusting race war awareness campaign.[June 1, 2011]).
No doubt Conservatism Inc. was relieved when Maher cited the Council of Conservative Citizens rather than a more Establishment site. So they joined on the pile-on. Writing on Breitbart.com, Jordan Schachtel describes Roof’s manifesto as advocating “neo-Nazi” beliefs and claimed that “through the Council of Conservative Citizens, Roof said he ‘found out about the Jewish problem and other issues facing our race.’” [Dylann Roof Manifesto Reveals Racist, Neo-Nazi, Anti-American Beliefs, Breitbart.com, June 20, 2015]
Essentially everything Schachtel writes here is false. The only thing Roof said he learned about from the Council of Conservative Citizen’s website was accurate information about black crime and lies about the Trayvon Martin scam—issues that Breitbart itself has regularly highlighted. Roof said he “researched deeper,” presumably from other sources, before forming opinions on Jews.
In fact, even its critics do not call the CofCC anti-Semitic. It carries nothing that could even conceivably considered anti-Semitic. For that matter, the only mention of Nazism in Roof’s manifesto is where he says “I myself would have rather lived in 1940’s American than Nazi Germany.”
Schachtel then goes on to note how the organization has nothing to do with the Republican Party because it “has been condemned by the Republican National Committee for holding ‘racist and nationalist’ views.” Yet this fails to acknowledge that the reason this occurred was that so many Republican politicians, including Trent Lott, Bob Barr, Haley Barbour, Mike Huckabee and Roger Wicker had associated with it, and the RNC was trying to shame other politicians from doing the same. (See James Kirkpatrick’s Scalise And GOP Don’t Want To Admit It, But They Needed Duke (= White) Vote. They Still Do).
Although the GOP has tried to completely marginalize the Council, there are still some state level politicians who ignore the party line and work with the group. As recently as 2013, Council board member Roan Garcia-Quintana was on South Carolina governor Nikki Haley’s steering committee for reelection.
And this goes to the larger issue: by joining in the attacks on the Council, Conservatism Inc. and the GOP are providing more fodder for the Left. It will now proceed to look for more “links” between the GOP and the Council, and for evidence that Roof may have read more conventional websites.
All the RNC’s efforts have not stopped the MSM from trumpeting even more attenuated ties. Notably, it turns out that Earl Holt has contributed $65,000 to various Republican politicians including Rand Paul, Mitt Romney, Ted Cruz, Rob Portman, Rick Santorum and Jeff Flake. CITE
(Actually, I am surprised that a supposedly far-right leader is giving thousands of dollars to amnesty supporters like Jeff Flake and Rand Paul. I’m reminded of Joe Sobran’s quip after Bob Barr apologized for speaking to the group:

“[I]t has been reported in several newspapers that I once spoke to the Council of Conservative Citizens, which is currently being pilloried as a radical racist organization. It`s true I addressed them some years ago. But I should state here, for the record, that I would never have accepted their invitation if I had known then of their associations with Republican leaders.”[Change This Document!, Sobran.com, February 4, 1999])

Anyway, fleeing from the MSM, Romney, Paul, Cruz, and Portman have all announced they are either returning the donations or giving it to black charities.
Even if Holt were as evil as the MSM pretends he is, returning his donations sets a terrible precedent for GOP politicians. They are acknowledging they are responsible for the views of their donors. This invites the MSM to sort through FEC filings and find new scandals. As much as the Republican Party tries to be politically correct, their supporters are not. In the upcoming months, expect to see someone who made intemperate about gay marriage or black crime on Facebook contributing 200 dollars to Ted Cruz as national news.
In contrast, while I have no brief for Ron Paul, he realized the trap of setting a PC litmus test for his financial supporters. When the MSM went after him from accepting donations from people far to the right of Mr. Holt, his campaign responded:

All of our campaign’s energy is dedicated to spreading the message of liberty and limited government, and we do not spend time screening donors or blocking websites…If a small number individuals who hold racist beliefs want to waste their money by giving to Dr. Paul, a man who stands firmly against their small minded ideologies, then the campaign will simply use those funds to protect freedom, peace and civil liberties across our Nation.
[Ron Paul Refuses to Divest of Donations from Neo-Nazis, By Josh Harkinson, Mother Jones, November 15, 2007]

Similarly, by demonizing the Council, Breitbart accepts that it’s fair to attack any news source that may have indirectly influenced Roof. But just because Roof did not cite Breitbart or other Conservatism Inc. websites in his manifesto does not mean that once the FBI goes through his browsing history, they won’t find them.
In fact, many of the black-on-white crime stories that the Council’s website links to came from Breitbart, and it praised Andrew Breitbart as a hero. [Conservative hero passes away, March 2012]. If the Council of Conservative Citizens is responsible for Dylan Roof liking the Council’s website, then why isn’t Breitbart responsible for the Council liking Breitbart?
Lenin may never have said “the capitalists will sell us the rope with which to hang them,” but the modern reality is much worse.
Today, the GOP and Conservatism Inc. are giving the Cultural Marxists the rope for free.
Alexander Hart (email him) is a conservative journalist.

Wknd Box Office: Captain Phillips, Populaire, Machete Kills, Blue Caprice

Here is an interesting article from http://www.debbieschlussel.com/ reviewing some of the movies that came out over the past weekend. This follows this post about some of the movies from last week and THIS POST about some movies that have been released over the past few years that you might have missed! This all follows this post about guidelines to choosing good movies to watch yourself!

Wknd Box Office: Captain Phillips, Populaire, Machete Kills, Blue Caprice

By Debbie Schlussel

One of the best movies I’ve seen all year–a must see in my book–debuts at theaters today. Here are my reviews of what’s new at the box office:

* “Captain Phillips“: This is a GREAT movie. It’s thrilling, Islamic terrorists are the villains, the Navy SEALs are the good guys, and there is no mincing of the true story on which it is based–the story of Somali Muslim terrorist “pirates,” who hijack the Maersk Alabama ship. Tom Hanks is absolutely fantastic, and you forget he’s Tom Hanks. The terror Captain Richard Phillips felt is clear and very palpable. You are on the edge of your seat from the beginning of the first attempted hijacking, until the end of the movie. It is worth every of 134 minutes and ten-plus bucks spent on this.

While there is a tiny sliver of PC here–the words “allahu [FUBAR]” are never uttered, for instance, and at the beginning it shows the poor town the pirates come from and how Islamic warlords “force” them to do this–it doesn’t matter, because the truth is clear to anyone who sees this film. Remember, it is directed by Paul Greengrass, who also directed “United 93″ (read my review), another terrific film I’ve reviewed, which doesn’t engage in excuses or political correctness toward Islamic terrorists and their real-life choices and actions. The “pirates” a/k/a terrorists wear keffiyeh scarves, they speak Arabic, and it’s quite clear who they are, even though one of them, at the beginning of the hijacking of the ship, one of them says they aren’t Al-Qaeda and won’t hurt the crew (famous last words also heard on United 93 and all the other planes hijacked on 9/11).

I am reminded of when I walked out of a showing of “United 93″ and I asked two Muslims who were also there if they liked it. They replied, “Well, it was okay, but they shouldn’t have made the villains Muslim.” Muslims seeing this film will feel the same way (or they will pooh-pooh it as depicting the acts of “abeed”–their version of the N-word, as Islam has a strong racist component).

The Somalian Muslim terrorists in the movie are very convincing (especially the leader, played by Barkhad Abdi), probably because they are all played by real-life Somalian Muslim immigrants from Minneapolis (who’ve never acted before). See, we finally found a useful role for four of them, while many of the rest travel back to Somalia (and Kenya) for jihad or engage in Al-Shabaab immigration fraud, run child prostitution rings, and engage in other assorted disturbing violent crimes here in our own country. I would not be surprised if the Hollywood affirmative action fans nominate the Abdi for an Academy Award (he is good in this, though).

While it is true that the movie is based on Phillips’ book, and he comes off as the hero (although he makes some stupid mistakes in sympathy for the terrorists), even if the movie isn’t completely accurate, I still recommend it highly. It seems like it’s close enough. It appears the biggest dispute with the movie is that encompassed by a lawsuit against Maersk by the crew of the ship, in which they allege Phillips put them in danger by ignoring warnings that Somali pirates were targeting ships in that area. But that seems ridiculous because ships need to travel, and they cannot be shut out of the seas by Muslim “pirates.” (FYI, the powers that be are still looking for the $30,000 paid to the pirates, which remains missing. Navy SEALs were forced to take polygraph tests over this.)

To me, the biggest mistake was not arming the ship and its crew with a lot of guns, which was–apparently, at the time, against some international seafaring laws or something (which really isn’t mentioned or noted in the movie, a glaring omission because the question is certainly begged in the minds of viewers). It’s absurd, especially because the Somalis had guns, including high-powered machine guns. And that’s the only thing that gave them power over the ship and its crew.

One last thing: I chuckled as I read a description of the movie in yesterday’s Detroit Free Halal Press, which stated, “a pulse-pounding thriller as well as an exploration of the effects of globalization.” Huh? There have been Western ships sailing those seas–and targeted by Muslim pirates–for centuries. It was a problem, for example, during the time of President Thomas Jefferson (and long before the founding of America). Somebody needs to put down the Thomas Friedman book and get real.

A great movie, very entertaining, and you’ll love it!

FOUR REAGANS

. .



* “Populaire“: Absolutely charming and fun. I really liked it. A combination of comedy, drama, and romance.

This French movie, with English subtitles, takes place in 1959 and has clothes, sets, and hairstyles that resemble those of “Mad Men.” It tells the story of a French girl from a small town (Déborah François) who dreams of a job in the big city. She interviews for a secretarial job with an wealthy insurance salesman playboy, who is also a World War II veteran (Romain Duris, a terrific French actor who starred in another movie I loved, “Heartbreaker ["L'arnacoeur"]–read my review). She gets the job because of her speed in typing, albeit with just two of her fingers. And, while she is a terrible secretary, her boss notes that her typing is so fast, she could be a champion in typing competitions. So, the boss coaches her how to type with all ten fingers, and puts her through the paces for various local, national, and other typing competitions. At the same time, she is falling in love with him, but he is cold to her.

While the movie is somewhat predictable, it’s a cozy predictability. It’s a funny, cheery movie, with lots of bright colors and eye candy. It’s a classy movie, with the exception of one sleazy scene akin to a “wet t-shirt,” that took away from the grace and dignity of the rest of the film.

This is not for kids, but for adults, it’s well worth the time and money.

THREE-AND-A-HALF REAGANS



* “Machete Kills“: This sequel to the awful illegal alien war cry movie, “Machete” (read my review), is far more awful. While this incredibly violent and bloody movie is supposed to be campy and funny, it’s little of either. Mostly, it looks like cheap, low-budget churn from Hollywood. Yes, there are cool gadgets, such as Sofia Vergara’s machine gun bra. But the movie is dumb, dopey, and a waste of time. I wanted to walk out repeatedly and should have.

The “story”: Machete (Danny Trejo, a real-life convicted violent criminal several times over) is offered a deal by President Charlie Sheen (in this movie, he’s credited under his real name, Carlos Estevez). If he captures the leader of a major drug cartel, he will instantly get U.S. citizenship. So he goes to Mexico to get the drug kingpin, and encounters a lot of trouble on the way there and back.

Another reason not to see this movie: it co-stars Jew-hater Mel Gibson, as a nutty billionaire American arms dealer who is in cahoots with the drug kingpin.

Another indicator of how ridiculous and stupid this movie is: several D-list celebs have small parts in this movie, including John Paul DeJoria, the face of Paul Mitchell haircare products, and Elon Musk, CEO of Space X and Tesla.

Oh, and just in case you forgot, this junky, pro-illegal alien/open borders schlock is funded, produced, and distributed to your movie theater screens by Sean Hannity’s, Michelle Malkin’s, Megyn Kelly’s, and Bill O’Reilly’s boss, Rupert Murdoch. YAY, FOX!

THREE MARXES PLUS THREE OBAMAS



* “Blue Caprice“: Absolutely awful and a complete whitewash of Islamic terrorism.

This movie is “based on the true story” of John Allen Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo, the Muslim Beltway Snipers. They were Islamic terrorists, who named their “route” of murders, “allah One.” But, to watch this long, boring waste of time, you’d never know it. Islam is never mentioned or shown. Instead, the movie shows us a bitter, mentally ill Muhammad (who is called merely “John,” a sanitized, non-Islamic name, in this movie) is nuts and upset at “the system” because he lost custody of his children from his ex-wife and can’t see them. The movie tells you that this is the only reason he and Malvo murder Americans in and around the Beltway area of Washington, DC and its suburbs.

I was amazed that a story that could be so thrilling in its depiction was such a disappointment. Aside from the absolute dishonesty of this movie, it is beyond uninteresting. I struggled to stay awake. It’s slow, pointless, disjointed, and tries sooooo badly to be “artsy.” It isn’t. A politically correct, white-washed yawner. Skip this.

FOUR MARXES PLUS FOUR BIN LADENS