- Former Prison Break star Lane Garrison might be making a real-life prison break of his own. Garrison, whose “Tweener” character was killed off from the show last season (which reminds me – the show returns soon, August 29, to be exact) had plead guilty to vehicular manslaughter and drunken driving charges stemming from a 2006 auto accident that left one passenger dead and other injured. On Thursday, a judge ordered him to undergo a 90-day evaluation period in prison before determining his sentence, but there is speculation that the judge could release him after those 90 days. Forget landing a major role on a hit TV drama; if this case plays out with Garrison only serving three months behind bars after driving drunk and being responsible for the death of another human being as a result, this would be the true big break of his life. Given how often people with one conviction for driving drunk end up with more convictions for the same offense once they’re given a second chance, it’s a scary and dangerous proposition to let someone off the hook so easily. Here’s sincerely hoping that Garrison takes advantage of the opportunity and doesn’t venture down this path again.
- Is ESPN trying to make the already miserable death march of Barry Bonds to his 756th home run even more unbearable? If so, the network is doing a great job by adding the most aggravating, grating and annoying announcer possible to every telecast of a Giants game as Bonds nears the record – which is every day, because ESPN is now televising every Giants’ game until the record is reached. The announcer in question? Chris Berman. I’ve criticized Berman before because his shtick is so tired and so played, but having to listen to him for the duration of a three-hour broadcast ruins nearly all of the enjoyment I get out of watching a baseball game. Everything he says, he just has to make as cutesy, clever and funny as possible, which usually means awkward, unfunny remarks that leave you smacking your open hand into your forehead repeatedly in disbelief. Adding to the bad atmosphere during last night’s broadcast was Berman taking a minute out to remark on the terrible bridge-collapse tragedy in Minneapolis (which was not a problem) and then Berman pausing in what would appear to be him creating an opening for broadcast partner Joe Morgan to add his well wishes for those affected by the incident. Morgan was either eating his dinner, not listening to Berman or just totally oblivious, because he just sat there completely silent, thereby making it look like he either had no sympathy for those affected by the bridge collapse or was so focused on the game that he couldn’t be bothered with anything else, neither of which is an acceptable response. All in all, props to ESPN for making an already gloomy morass of ill will and resentment and compounding it even further with some of the worst baseball announcing we’ve heard in years.
- Does our government actually revel in giving a giant middle finger to hurting Americans? It might seem like a preposterous statement, but it’s hard not to make after a three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals gave a ginormous “F*** You!” to tens of thousands of victims of Hurricane Katrina victims who were seeking to receive money from their insurance companies for damages to their homes and businesses caused when levees in and around New Orleans broke. One analyst assessing the case said that the insurance industry could have taken a “multibillion dollar hit” if the judges had ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, a fact I’m sure would have been heartbreaking to millions of Americans – or not. Actually, it would have led to everyone else’s premium’s going sky high, so it might not have been the most positive thing for the country in general. The panel decided that those filing the lawsuit are “not entitled to recover under their policies,” which you have to agree with. After all, paying exorbitant insurance premiums to have an insurance company protect your property and provide you with compensation in case of an emergency or disaster does not entitle you to receive compensation from your insurance company in case of an emergency or disaster. The decision overturns a ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Stanwood Duval Jr., who sided with the policyholders in November in their contention that the language excluding water-damage claims from some of their insurance policies was vague and ambiguous. The three judges on the panel vehemently disagreed with that assessment, dealing a decisive blow for the big business, corporate defendant and a swift kick in the junk the little guy, the hurricane victims in need of assistance to rebuild their lives. Good job, justice system, you rock!
- I do love being right, so I am happy to tell you that in keeping with my prediction, The Bourne Ultimatum is indeed the best of the “Big Four” third installments in major movie franchises this summer. Spiderman 3 kicked things off in spectacularly unspectacular fashion, setting the bar so low that those following could step over it without breaking a sweat. Next up was Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End, a good movie that was nonetheless sidetracked and blown way out of character and proportion by the weight of its own massive hype and expectations. Everyone was expecting something so big and so amazing that Jerry Bruckheimer and Co. obliged, turning in a movie that lost most, if not all of the charm and appeal of the initial Pirates movie. Third on the summer movie docket was Ocean’s Thirteen, wherein the focus was trying to bounce back from a subpar second movie in the series which many people dubbed too clever, too complicated and lacking in the humor that made Ocean’s Eleven such a hit. Thirteen succeeded in recapturing that spirit and was better than the two other summer blockbusters to that point, but it still wasn’t what I would call a great movie. The Bourne Ultimatum, on the other hand, is an amazing movie that makes you think and follow along without overwhelming you in complicated, confusing details and contains not one, but two thrilling chase scenes that have become a hallmark of the Bourne franchise. Without giving away too much of the plot, I’ll say that as usual, Jason Bourne is traversing the globe (Western Europe mostly, also northern Africa for a bit), running from those chasing him and trying to remember the details of his life before he came to be a human killing machine working for the United States government. The producers and writers did a good job of weaving in the fabric of the first two movies in the series, mostly through flashbacks as Bourne struggles to remember his past, but also in a couple of scenes hailing back to The Bourne Identity, including one in which Julia Styles’ character dyes and cuts her hair just like Franka Potente did in Identity. The ending is a great one, so you won't be leaving the theater disappointed at all. Even if you wasted $25-30 seeing the first three movies I mentioned, you’ll get your money’s worth and then some with The Bourne Ultimatum.
- There aren’t many things more ironic than the U.S. Senate passing an ethics bill. What’s not ironic or remotely surprising is that the dipshit sitting in the Oval Office right now is likely to veto what many are calling the biggest advance in congressional ethics in decades. While senators voted overwhelming (83-14) to pass a bill by an that would make lawmakers pay for private plane rides, disclose more information about their own efforts to fund pet projects and be more up front about raising money from lobbyists, W. has expressed “serious concerns” about the bill and threatened to veto it. Thankfully, based on the results of the Senate vote, there is more than enough support to override a veto, but why would a president who prides himself on talking about integrity and truth veto a bill that would bring more of both to our nation’s legislature? Well, the reason for that is that W. believes the bill is “toothless as a West Virginian trailer dweller” and……..ok, so I made the West Virginian part up, but he did label the bill toothless on the issue of earmarks. Earmarks are targeted spending projects included in bills, and this new bill would require lawmakers to publicize plans to request an earmark 48 hours before a Senate vote and certify that they have no direct financial interest in the earmarked items. W. and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., a W. crony, don’t feel that is a substantial enough measure. This is a win-win situation for the senators, though, because if the bill becomes a law then they become the senators who helped reform congressional ethics and if it is vetoed and dies, they can still say they did their part and point to the Tool in Chief as the real culprit.
No comments:
Post a Comment