Category Archives: I Did Not Know That

Gingrich comfortable in New-t skin.

Newt Gingrich debate image

From contentious to contender.

 

 

 

 

 

 

As the GOP presidential nomination campaign begins to heat up, I continue to be fascinated by the Newt Gingrich candidacy. What began as seemingly an attempt to merely get some face time to promote some ideas and, conceivably, his consulting business has gradually emerged into a legitimate chance of capturing the nomination. Heading into a South Carolina foreign policy debate today, he is either 1st, 2nd or 3rd in every poll.

Perhaps “meteoric” is a bit too strong a term to describe his ascendancy toward legitimacy; Herman Cain’s rise was more of the meteoric variety. Gingrich’s ascension has been more the result of a methodical, deliberate and steadfast approach, coupled with a much softer, less self-promoting style that has won over many potential GOP voters.

During the early debate season I pointed out that Gingrich seemed to be the only candidate on the stage who was not citing his resume and who also was offering gratuitous compliments to his competitors. I, evidently like many others, found this to be especially refreshing relative to the bickering (Perry-Romney) and experience touting (Bachman-Santorum) displayed by the field. In essence, Gingrich’s approach was more similar with Ron Paul’s: no sugar-coating, tell it like it is, don’t worry about the consequences. Yet Paul, who will simply never be able to win over mainstream Republicans due to his non interventionist foreign policy views, remains in low single digits, where Gingrich began. Evidently Newt did take a momentary respite from the soft Newt 2.0 in a chippy exchange with CNBC debate moderator Maria Bartiromo. Otherwise he’s portraying a different persona from the demonized, acidic, abrasive (though acerbic) Gingrich we came to know during the ’95 and ’96 budget battles with President Clinton.

When Newt first announced his presidency, he was hammered from the Right Wing media over his global warming PSA with Nancy Pelosi. He now concedes that it was a huge mistake. However, it should be noted that during the time since Gingrich resigned as Speaker of the House he has been committed to promoting bipartisan solutions; specifically, ideas with poll support of 80% or higher. That explains the Pelosi ad.

Other than that, the perceived bugaboo that would hold back any shot of a Gingrich nomination was his “personal peccadilloes” - to use the term many pundits applied to Bill Clinton’s alleged persona as sexual predator. In Newt’s case, the peccadillo was merely falling for a younger woman while still technically married to his wife, thus, like Clinton, being an adulterer. Needless to say, the religious Right will hold such an act against a GOP candidate more than the Left will do toward a Democrat.

But you know, I found out something interesting while listening to Sean Hannity the other day. He cited the widespread narrative that Newt was such an evil man that he “divorced his first wife while she was dying of cancer.”

Indeed, I can remember people parroting that narrative. What I didn’t realize until the other day when Hannity (he and Newt go way back to Hannity’s Atlanta talk radio days) mentioned it is that Gingrich’s first wife is still alive! Go figure. I mean the divorce was, what, a decade ago? She was dying of cancer but she ultimately pulled through. Maybe divorcing her was the best thing he could’ve done for her. Now he’s on his second marriage which seems to be thriving. Reagan, same thing. Yes, some Conservative politicians do get divorced. Everyone gets a do-over apparently. Based on Gingrich’s performance in recent polls, he’s getting one as well. And, if you take away the personal issues – much like what Rudy Giuliani had to battle when he ran for the nomination four years ago – then based on experience, intelligence, and common sense ideas, Gingrich is clearly your best GOP candidate.

The revelation that his first wife still lives really put things into a different light for me. I too was somewhat holding it against him. But now I can rethink it a bit. Perhaps the “death bed” characterization was exaggerated by a enemy media. After all, not many people ever get up from that bed.

One other point on this: reporting the bad Newt news while not providing the postscript is part of the media playbook. That his first wife survived his death bed divorce is one example where you had to follow Right Wing media to hear that postscript is one example. A second and even more significant example was the trumped up ethics charges against then Speaker Gingrich, for teaching a history class at a university while being employed as a US Representative.

This was headline news. I will never forget Tom Brokaw one night on NBC news telling us, “It’s big trouble for the Speaker.”

Many months later, Gingrich was exonerated of any ethics violations, but this did not make the headlines.

Anyway, though there doesn’t appear to be any live TV coverage of tonight’s foreign policy debate, one in which I’d expect Newt to do well, I’ll be looking forward to the news and sound bytes that derive from this event. At this point you can’t count out Gingrich. And let’s face it, if the media narrative is that the GOP field has imploded and no one has a shot at beating President Obama next November, then whom – perhaps besides Ron Paul – would you rather see debating the President next year? That would be must-see TV for sure.

A possible answer to the question: What’s a reverse mortgage?

Robert Wagner for reverse mortgages

From Bob to boiler room?

A few weeks ago I posted a not necessarily rhetorical question about reverse mortgages: specifically, I didn’t get what element of the transaction makes it ”reverse”. I compared it to the term “reverse discrimination” – i.e., discrimination is discrimination regardless who assumes the roles of perpertrator and victim. In that manner, I see “reverse” mortgages as simply mortgages.

Meanwhile, today, my favorite columnist Phil Mushnick cites reverse mortgages as scams targeted at vulnerable seniors, whereby when you sign up to receive more information, you are called incessantly, day and night, and hit with boiler room scam tactics.

So on that note, I think I may have figured out a better name for this particular transaction: a reverse bank robbery. The bank robs you.

Christmas in October at your local stores

Home Depot Christmas display

59 shopping days left! Get moving, people!

Why was it that a few weeks ago I went to the Home Depot looking for Halloween decorations and already the store contained a massive Christmas section? It’s a sign of the economic times indeed. They want to get you thinking about Christmas this early so you’ll start saving up for your annual spree. Can’t help but wonder if Home Depot ultimately shot itself in the foot by relinquishing potential Halloween sales by consuming floor space for Christmas stuff. The Christmas decorations were prominently displayed in the front of the store and I could not find any Halloween paraphanalia. Target, on the other hand, had both. Probably a good move.

Business Oz usual: on to my next Oz endeavor

Magic of Oz book cover by L. Frank Baum

Upward and Ozward

I’m on to reading my next book in the Oz series. This is the thirteenth book in the series by original author L. Frank Baum, called “The Magic of Oz”. It’s my 11th book overall; I skipped books 10 and 11 based on availability at my local library but I’ll get to those eventually. This one was penned in 1919, so the first thing that compels me is the dedication from Baum, which reads as follows:

I Dedicate this Book to the Children of our Soldiers, the Americans and their Allies, with unmeasured Pride and Affection.

That of course would’ve been a reference to World War 1. My first Oz-related post a few weeks ago provided the assertion that Baum painted Oz as ostensibly (or I should say “Oz-stensibly) as a socialist land, with no money, with people taking what they need and contributing what they can – led by a Princess who treats them as her children. I also questioned whether Baum actually espoused this form of government or if he viewed it as a fairy tale that in reality could never be achieved. Whatever the answer to that question is, I have to commend Baum’s patriotic dedication found in this book.

I’ll soon find out what other fascinating tidbits about the mysterious and magical land of Oz are revealed in this book. Also noteworthy is that in his introduction he acknowledges his battle with illness that took his life soon after. His fourteenth and final book, “Glinda of Oz” was published posthumously.

Again, I began reading these to my kids after they’d first seen the Wizard of Oz movie – but by about book 7 they became too scary (some of the images of certain characters in particular) – but I became hooked myself so I opted to finish the Baum canonical series on my own (still have 4 to go).

Meanwhile, I got a great tip from both a friend and my wife that I should try reading the Nancy Drew mysteries to my daughters because they won’t be nearly as creepy. I’m pretty sure I read one of them myself as a kid. And, given that my kids are fans of Scooby Doo, Drew would make sense as a book choice.

And… stream of consciousness here… speaking of Scooby Doo, we just got the latest Redbox release of a Scooby cartoon movie. The current movies pale in comparison to the classics; in particular, whomever is doing the voice of Shaggy is no Casey Kasem – who also rocked as Robin in the Superfriends cartoons (versatile!). The voices of Freddy and Thelma sound the same – kind of like the recent Winnie the Pooh movie where some of the voices were the same as the original Pooh movies. I also happened to detect the voices of the venerable Fred Willard and also Matthew Gray Gubler of Criminal Minds.

Another Oz-mazing tidbit

Tin Woodman of Oz book cover

Timeless… and ageless, it turns out

I’m just about through the 12th book about the Land of Oz by L. Frank Baum, “The Tin Woodman of Oz” – and in this edition we find out a couple new tidbits about the fairest of fairylands. Baum seemed to teach his readers a little something new about Oz in each successive offering. Previously I had discovered that Oz was ostensibly a socialist land which also enacted a closed-borders policy once its leaders determined there were enough inhabitants in this special place.

In the Tin Woodman of Oz, we also discover that people cannot be killed in Oz, apart from the rare exception like the Wicked Witch of the East’s demise (turned to dust after Dorothy’s house landed on her). What’s more, beings don’t age in the Land of Oz either. So Ozma and Dorothy, by the twelfth book, are as young as they were in the earlier tales – not unlike the Simpsons.

The inability to perish is a key theme in this particular book, because it turns out that the Tin Woodman comes to find that his old “meat” body parts that were dismembered when the Wicked Witch of the East adversely enchanted his axe were still functional – a discovery he made when calling up Ku-Klip, the tinsmith who replaced his members with tin substitutes. In eerie fashion, he even had a conversation with his former and currently dismembered head, that of “Nick Chopper” as he was known before his grotesque series of dismembering mishaps. Further, the tinsmith took Nick’s live body parts and combined them with those of Captain Fyter – a man who had the exact same misfortune as Nick Chopper and became the Tin Soldier – to create a human called “Chopfyt,” having Captain Fyter’s head and various arms and legs of each former meat person. One arm was missing, so for that arm, Ku-Klip supplanted one made of tin.

Very Reanimator and Bride of Reanimator-like, except that these body parts never perished, so technically there was no reanimation – just animation. The parts were glued together with a special magic glue, by the way.

Also in this book we find out how Oz became a fairyland in the first place. It was an isolated territory surrounded by the Deadly Desert, when one day Queen Lurline passed over Oz while on a journey, enchanted the country and so made it a fairyland. She left one of her fairies to rule Oz – and from that moment no one in Oz ever died.

I still have 4 of Baum’s Oz books to go, so I look forward to what other tidbits about Oz are revealed in those. Any of interest I will pass along.

The Ulstermen Weekend

Michael Hoey European PGA Tour with Dunhill Links championship trophy

Irish eyes are smiling (and Irish guys are golfing)

Golf sure teaches us a lot… and I’m not just talking about the do-the-right-thing, be-a-good-sportsman, call penatlies on yourself, learn proper ediquette aspects about which we often hear. I’m also talking about how the game is so international that watching golf teaches you geography and culture.

Over the weekend, I watched as three “Ulstermen” contended for the European PGA Tour’s Dunhill Links championship. I hadn’t heard the term “Ulstermen” before, though I knew they were referring to three Northern Irishmen, eventual winner Michael Hoey (pictured above), 2011 US Open champ Rory McIroy and 2010 US Open champ (and Ryder Cup hero) Graeme McDowell. It’s a simple explanation: Ulster is one of four provinces in Northern Ireland.

Back in the 90s I discovered a bit more geography – the six states of Australia – while watching Australian golf coverage on The Golf Channel (New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia, Western Australia and Tazmania – though I don’t believe any of the golfers were Tazmanian).

Stream of consciousness: Tazmania was originally called “Van Diemen’s Land” – which explains the song title by U2 from their 1988 “Rattle and Hum” album. I learned all of this from watching golf.

Return to Oz movie poster

Oz seen on TV

Return to Oz movie poster

Forgotten sequel

If you’re a subscriber to Showtime/The Movie Channel, you may have noticed over the past few months the showings of ”Return to Oz” – the 1985 (non-musical) Disney picture about Dorothy’s triumphant return to the Land of Oz, starring a young Faruiza Balk (much younger than Judy Garland was when she portrayed Dorothy).

The film was an adaptation of the subsequent two novels by ”Wonderful Wizard of Oz” (on which “The Wizard of Oz” movie is based) author L. Frank Baum. The two books were, “The Marvelous Land of Oz,” and “Ozma of Oz.”

In attempting to adapt two novels into one movie, the film took some shortcuts, changed some characters and also stuck with the original Wizard of Oz movie paradigm in two manners; first, the ruby slippers were referenced (in the book they were silver shoes, not ruby slippers). Second, the “this was all a dream by Dorothy” scenario was repeated (though much more vaguely depicted as such in “Return to Oz” than in “The Wizard of Oz”). Disappointingly, characters were changed for the movie – the character of Gwenevere, a woman with 30 interchangeable heads, is instead portrayed as Mombi, the Witch who enslaves Ozma in the person of a boy named Tip, via enchantment.

Back to the original 1939 “Wizard of Oz” – in addition to the silver shoes (in lieu of ruby slippers) and “it was all a dream” (it was not a dream in Baum’s book), here are some of the other differences between the original “Wonderful Wizard of Oz” book and the “Wizard of Oz” movie (many of these characters/instances you’ll realize were simply impossible to reproduce in a 1939 movie):

  • During the cyclone, Toto flies out the window and is retrieved by his ear by the hand of Dorothy.
  • The “Tin Man” is never once referred to as such; he is the “Tin Woodman” (in subsequent books it is revealed that his human name was “Nick Chopper”). He was engaged to a munchkin girl while human (in book 12 he reunites with her; her name is “Nimmie Amee”), but the girl belonged to a wicked stepmother type who did not want to lose her indentured servitude and bribed the Wicked Witch of the East (with a cow and some sheep or pigs, I don’t recall) to enchant the Tin Woodman’s axe, which he proceeded to drop several times, severing each limb and eventually his torso. Each dismemberment was repaired by a local tinsmith. The lack of a heart in the tin torso is the reason the Tin Woodman left the munchkin girl; he no longer felt for her.
  • The Wicked Witch of the East and Wicked Witch of the West were not sisters, or relatives of any kind.
  • Glinda the Good is not a witch; technically, she is a Sorceress with benevolent tendencies. (In subsequent books she is also employed as the official recorder of Oz, documenting all instances that occur throughout the world as they happen.)
  • Before sending the flying monkeys after Dorothy and friends, the Wicked Witch of the West sent 40 wolves (heads chopped off by Tin Woodman), 40 crows (necks snapped by Scarecrow) and a swarm of bees (Dorothy, the Lion and Scarecrow stayed covered while the Tin Woodman let them all sting him, having no effect on his tin exterior and killing all of them by loss of stingers). NOTE: The Tin Woodman was a clutch performer in the Oz book; the MVF (Most Valuable Fairy).
  • There are no animals in the Emerald City (in the initial book), thus there was no “horse of a different color” in the book. (What animals there were in the entire Land of Oz all could talk. Eventually by Book 8, even Toto begins to talk.)
  • The Emerald City, in the initial book, was not Emerald at all. It was merely white, but each visitor/inhabitant was given green-tinted glasses which made it appear green. Guests were told the glasses were to shield them from the blindingly shiny green color, but it was a gimmick. Baum would often change the storyline over the course of the Oz books, so in subsequent books, the Emerald City really was green and not the result of special glasses being worn.
  • The Wicked Witch actually enslaved Dorothy for three days, and kept the Lion in bondage where she wished to harness and ride him like a horse (she never succeeded in this peculiar quest). The enslavement ended when Dorothy and the Witch tussled over the silver shoes (not ruby slippers) and Dorothy – intentionally, not accidentally as in the film – splashed her with water, unwittingly causing her to melt.
  • The flying monkeys actually helped Dorothy and friends return to the Emerald City once the Wicked Witch of the West was conquered. The only reason the monkeys were dispatched by the Witch was because she stumbled at some point onto the Golden Cap which rendered the monkeys servants of the cap’s owner, for only three commands. (Retrieving Dorothy and the Lion and temporarily destroying the Scarecrow and Tin Woodman was the Witch’s third and final command). Upon liquidating the Witch, Dorothy seized the Golden Cap and was able to command the monkeys themselves. The monkeys weren’t really as scary as in the film – they were merely mischevious until a former Princess in Oz grew tired of their mischief and enchanted a Golden Cap which would make them faithful servants, for good or evil – depending on who possessed the cap. (The book didn’t specify how the Witch gained possession of the cap.)
  • The Scarecrow was left in charge of the Emerald City (and by extension, all of Oz), just as in the film. However, in the film, the Wizard leaves the Tin Woodman and the Lion to assist the Scarecrow. Not so in the book, where the Tin Woodman departs and becomes the Emperor of the Winkie country and the Cowardly Lion, as he covets in the film, does become King of the Forest in the southerly Quadling Country.
  • Other creatures not seen in the movie (all pictured below) included: the field mice and their queen, who lift and transport the Cowardly Lion from the poppy field (it wasn’t Glinda who saved them like in the movie); the Kalidahs, half tiger, half bear beasts; the hammerheads – no arms or legs, only jack-in-the-box like springs that allowed them to pack a mighty wallop if trifled with.

Field Mice of Oz

 

Kalidahs of Oz

Kalidahs: half tiger, half bear

Hammerheads of Oz