New RoboCop Trailer….Did We Really Need A Remake?

Is it me or does the idea of doing a RoboCop remake remind you of the time the WWF tried to bring in a “new” “Razor Ramon”? Anyways, in case you haven’t seen it, here’s the trailer for the new RoboCop movie:

Ehhh….this trailer doesn’t leave me feeling very optimistic about the remake to the 1987 action classic. The original RoboCop was a masterpiece. The perfect combination of originality, satire, and political commentary wrapped up in 102 minutes of pulse pounding badassery. Originally written as a critique of the corporatist culture of the Reagan era, the original RoboCop’s message has a timeless appeal. The trailer for this remake demonstrate none of that, looking to instead replace the well crafted commentary with explosions and Samuel Jackson. Don’t get me wrong, I love explosions and Sam Jackson, but the hacks in Hollywood didn’t need to use the RoboCop franchise to make that kind of movie. Hopefully this isn’t just another one of Hollywood’s attempts to cash in on another one of my beloved  childhood franchises, but at this point i’m skeptical.

Advertisements

Was Fox Sports Wrong To Fire Craig James?

Over at The Atlantic, Conor Friedersdorf writes about the firing of former NCAA analyst Craig James for comments made during his 2012 Senate run. After his brief and unsuccessful foray into the political world Fox Sports News Southwest hired the former ESPN alumni only to fire him after just one appearance. Conor disagrees with their decision:

A network would be justified in firing a sports broadcaster for expressing controversial moral or political views during an entertainment telecast that had nothing to do with the subject. But to not hire someone for prior remarks made amid civic debate, and that are indistinguishable from the position taken by almost half of all Americans at the time?

That action strengthens a suboptimal norm, even if Fox Sports is acting within its legal rights.

America is always going to be a diverse country that encompasses people with very different political views and moral values. In order to get along, despite our differences, it is useful to debate divisive issues openly through the civic process, and to establish spheres where what divides us is set aside as irrelevant. Fox Sports’s actions undermine society’s ability to do both things

I tend to agree with this point. It would be one thing if James had made a roaring inflammatory remark like the infamous “You’re a sodomite. I hope you get AIDS and die.” comment made by then MSNBC talk show host Michael Savage. But James’ statement that homosexuals will have to “answer to the Lord for their actions” isn’t even in the same solar plane of existence.

The first amendment arguments against the firing of James are obvious.  This is America, a country where individuals have the right to express their personal beliefs in an open and  civilized manner regardless of how unpopular they might be. To that extent, every free speech organization should be rallying around James and pressuring Fox Sports to reconsider their decision. (ACLU are you listening?)

The larger first amendment issues arising from this incident are even more alarming. Christians…well let’s be honest…Christian CONSERVATIVES… have often complained about a so called “War on Christianity” being waged in America. While most of their claims of discrimination are plain and utter BS, our attempts to ensure political equality has on occasion lead to pointless over reaching.  There’s enough real and significant issues of discrimination occurring in America that we don’t need to persecute schools who say “Merry Christmas” or fire football analysts for expressing their beliefs off air. The right to religious freedom is not the right to be free of religion. Religious freedom guarantees every American the right to exercise their religious beliefs, or lack there of, as long as those beliefs are not forced upon those around them.  Defenders of religious freedom would be best served to keep that in mind before the public discussion shifts focus from equality for the minority to discrimination against the majority.

Socialism: The Answer To All Our Economic Woes

“Businesses don’t hire because taxes are lower. That’s because taxes represent a relatively small part of the cost of hiring. And if taxes did make a difference then it would stand to reason that hiring would have been much lower under Bill Clinton’s presidency when rates were higher than they were under George W. Bush when taxes were slashed. Unfortunately, the truth is quite the opposite — under Clinton, companies hired nearly eight times more workers – 22.2 million — while Bush presided over the creation of 3 million jobs – the worst performance in the last 60 years. “

 

— Peter Cohan, Socialism today…aka Forbes Magazine

 

Wow. Businesses don’t automatically create jobs when you give them huge tax breaks?! My whole life perspective…shattered…

The paragraph above comes from that crazy crazy leftist Forbes magazine (what the fuck do they know about business, i know.) But their ultimate conclusion is even more interesting:

 

Companies hire only when not hiring means they can’t satisfy customer demand. Put another way, companies hire when the profits missed from not hiring exceed the cost of adding a new worker.

 

For those of you who have trouble following the bouncing ball let me paraphrase and simplify.

It’s the demand stupid.

Conservatives often claim that businesses must be given incentives to hire people. This is 90% false and 10% true. As with any rational actor, businesses, like people, respond to incentives. But the equivocation that conservatives make occurs when they confuse market based incentives with government incentives. Government incentives only save profit. Consumer demand creates profit.  And if we want businesses to grow, IE hire more people, then we must cultivate a larger buyers market by financially empowering people and not big business.

 

 

 

Under President Bush Republicans Voted 19 Times For Debt Ceiling Increase

Wish I could say this was surprising:

After pushing the government to brink of shutdown last week, Republican Congressional leaders are now preparing to push America to the edge of default by refusing to increase the nation’s debt limit without first getting Democrats to concede to large spending cuts.

But while the four Republicans in Congressional leadership positions are attempting to hold the increase hostage now, they combined to vote for a debt limit increase 19 times during the presidency of George W. Bush. In doing so, they increased the debt limit by nearly $4 trillion.

NINETEEN TIMES!

Can any Republicans out there seriously say with a straight face that the House GOP has the country’s best interest in mind? If John Boehner and Eric Cantor were real public officials with a real grownup sense of responsibility that usually accompanies those in office, then the debt ceiling would be raised without negotiations. After all protecting the economy from economic collapse is…really important.

But of course, Cantor and Boehner aren’t grownups and have no grownup sense of responsibility.  They ask for a ridiculously high amount of tax cuts, while agreeing to a  disproportionally  low amount of revenue increases. And then when the President finally agrees to that…NOPE! Not good enough!

This Week In Movies

It’s official. Spike Lee WILL be directing a sequel to Oldboy.

HOLY CRAP! The teaser image from The Dark Knight Rises is intense. Maybe the new Batman movie won’t suck after all.

A new Tin Tin trailer. (With Steve Spielberg directing, Peter Jackson producing, and John Williams scoring, the Tin Tin movie can’t suck right? Right?!) [Edgar Wright also did the script!]

Arnold Schwarzenegger first movie role since returning to Hollywood, will definitely please his conservative fans.

Hey Sly. Casting Christian Slater in a key role in your next flick doesn’t exactly project confidence.