Archive for the ‘politics’ Category

By John Ruberry

If you only have a minute and you want to know, in a nutshell, what the Netflix adaptation of Tom Wolfe’s novel from 1998, A Man in Full, is all about, here it is: The lead character, Atlanta businessman Charlie Croker, is Donald Trump–orange hair and all. Then throw in elements of the George Floyd and Rodney King stories and add an even more shocking ending than the one in Boogie Nights.

Earlier this month, Netflix started streaming the six-episode series, which stars Jeff Daniels and Diane Lane. 

Wolfe, who is my favorite writer, after a two-decade career in journalism, made a smooth transition into fiction with his first novel, The Bonfire of the Vanities. It encapsulates the boom years of 1980s–along with the mayhem of pre-Rudy Giuliani New York City. Three years later, the film version was released. It is godawful, starting with the miscasting of Tom Hanks in the lead role as “the Master of the Universe,” Sylvester McCoy. After I suffered through the movie, I said to myself, Vanities is a mini-series not a two-hour movie.

I had hopes, misguided ones it turns out, that A Man in Full would be better, because it is a mini-series. Adding to my anticipation was Netflix streaming last year the insightful documentary, Radical Wolfe.

As A Man in Full begins, Charlie Croker (Daniels) is celebrating his 60th birthday at a party with Shania Twain entertaining his friends, family, and business associates. Two of those guests are executives from PlannersBanc, his principal lender, Raymond Peepgrass (Tom Pelphrey) and Harry Zale (Bill Camp). While it appears that Croker is an Atlanta version of a Master of the Universe, he’s broke–Charlie owes PlannersBanc $600 million. He’s overextended with other lenders too. Peepgrass and Zale want to carve up Croker’s empire, starting with his quail hunting plantation and his corporate jet. A rescue is offered by the mayor of Atlanta, Wes Jordan (William Jackson Harper), who is campaigning for reelection, and Croker’s attorney, Roger White (Aml Ameen). But to save his neck, Croker will have to betray his former Georgia Tech football teammate, Norman Bagovitch (John Lacy), who is running against Jordan.

Bagovitch–wait for it–decries the status of the white male in his campaign. Jordan is Black.

David E. Kelley wrote the script, and he should be ashamed. No serious candidate for public office would campaign on such bigoted idiocy. And in Atlanta?!? Why does Kelley insult his audience?  

Oh yeah, he wants to demonize Trump. Orange Croker Bad. Oops, I mean Orange Man Bad.

Joyce Newman (Lucy Liu) is an alleged victim of a sexual assault from Bagovitch. In the book, well, let’s just say there is fear of a race riot because of the racial angle of that alleged rape.

Wolfe, brilliantly in my opinion, centered much of his plot on racial contrast and conflict, but also on Croker being an anachronism. The series is set in 2024, but events in the book take place a quarter of a century earlier. Croker, nicknamed the 60 Minute Man because he starred on offense and defense for Georgia Tech, played a lead role for a national championship Yellowjackets team, at a time when major college sports teams in the South were not integrated. Croker came of age just as the civil rights protests were picking up steam, and when Jim Crow laws were still in force in Georgia and other southern states. The world changed, but Croker, not so much. Sure, of course Croker in the novel knew blacks had equal rights, but they still belonged– and I’m not endorsing his sentiment–“in their place.”

Kelley, and the directors, eliminates that angle by turning Croker into Trump. He even does away with Charlie’s redemption in Wolfe’s novel.

There’s even a climate change dig included in the series. I mean, why not?

As Croker, Daniels, who is usually very good, is an embarrassment, beginning with his overwrought Foghorn Leghorn southern accent and his Trump-sized abdominal paunch. On the other hand, Diane Lane, as Charlie’s first wife, shines. I had the pleasure of seeing her at Chicago’s Goodman Theatre in Tennessee Williams’ Sweet Bird of Youth a decade ago.

Wolfe’s novel is over 700 pages long, so it’s understandable that some storylines are condensed. 

For instance, Conrad Hensley in the book is the child of worthless white hippies who, in spite of them, still manages to develop a strong moral compass. He works for Croker Foods in the East Bay area of California Hensley’s life, like Charlie’s, collapses. He ends up on the wrong side of the law after he violently tries to retrieve his towed car. By the way, anyone who has had his car towed and is forced to pay usurious fees to retrieve it, will sympathize with Hensley. In the series Hensley (Jan Michael Hill) is Black, and well, I already mentioned Rodney King and George Floyd. 

The subplot with Peepgrass and Martha Croker remains, with the Boogie Nights twist added. If you crave more details on that, click on this Daily Mail link.

Oh, the Crokers’ son, Wally (Evan Roe), sure looks a lot like Barron Trump in the series. 

Astonishingly, Trump-hating Fulton County district attorney Fani Willis doesn’t appear here. Maybe she was on a cruise with Nathan Wade during filming.

I guess I needed to suffer for some forgotten sins, because I endured all six episodes of A Man in Full. Of the other Netflix series that I punished myself with, in full, only The Pentaverate and Vikings: Valhalla were worse.

On the flipside, the cinematography for A Man in Full is sharp–Atlanta never looked so good. The soundtrack, compiled by Craig DeLeon, is spectacular, it’s as splendid as the best work of T-Bone Burnett. Keep an eye on DeLeon.

Wolfe, who died in 2018, didn’t like The Bonfire of the Vanities film. I don’t think he’d care for the series based on A Man in Full either.

I hated it.

A Man in Full is currently streaming on Netflix. It is rated TV-MA for violence, foul language, sex, and nudity.

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

It never ceases to amaze me how many people are shocked at the acts of the Biden Administration concerning Israel, particularly folks like Jonah Goldberg (a nice guy in person) and friends.

It appears that the folks who could have made a difference but decided to let the steal of the last election slide presumed that the goal of said steal was simply to remove Donald Trump which they were completely on board with. They now appear shocked SHOCKED that said folks had an actual agenda they wanted to push and are using said power to do so.

You mean to say if you let a bunch of bought and paid for crooks have power they might just use it? Amazing!


Apparently the shock SHOCK of Joe Biden deciding to suspend arms to Israel over attempting to destroy a group of terrorists who tired to annihilate them and still hold Israeli (and American) hostages is too much for some US senators.

 of the Democratic senators running for reelection, most are staying mum, including those running in swing states. They include, at the time of publishing, Wisconsin’s Tammy Baldwin, Montana’s Jon Tester, Ohio’s Sherrod Brown, and Nevada’s Jacky Rosen. Michigan Rep. Elissa Slotkin—who is running to replace the state’s outgoing senator, Debbie Stabenow—has also remained silent, as have her fellow House colleagues running for Senate seats, Rubén Gallego of Arizona and David Trone of Maryland.

Oddly enough those who are shocked into silence are almost exclusively running in either red or swing states. Senators from deep blue states like Massachusetts, Vermont and Connecticut where even supporting the slaughter of Jews can’t hurt a democrat have no problem praising the move.

Unexpectedly of course.


One person who is incapable of being shocked into silence is James Carville who at 80 is just as loud as he has ever been. However while he is not silent he is in fact shocked.

He is shocked that nothing the Democrats seem to do in this campaign is working against Trump:

What you might note in this tirade is no mention of Biden’s policies or the overreaching of the left or the abandonment of Israel or the Economy that’s tanking faster than the Chicago White Sox. He might take a lesson from this old piece written on the day of the Scott Brown vs Martha Coakley election so many years ago: (My comment) in bold underline

If Brown wins today in Massachusetts, we’re going to hear all kinds of explanations. Misplaced voter anger is already being invoked. Coakley ran a horrible campaign. The incumbent party is unpopular when times are bad. It snowed. Or it didn’t. Whatever. The simplest explanation is that a majority of the citizens of Massachusetts oppose ObamaCare. Maybe they shouldn’t. Maybe they don’t realize how great it will be. (HA! DTG) But if Brown wins, the simplest explanation is that the most important issue, health care, was decisive. The voters don’t like ObamaCare and this is their chance to say so.

The actual performance of this administration or the state of the country is not relevant to Mr. Carville. It’s all about the game. He’s a salesman one might even say a master salesman and his product is Democrats any democrats no matter what they do, no matter what they say and after decades of selling a crappy product to a gullible public he is shocked SHOCKED that there doesn’t seem to be enough marks falling for the pitch.


So let me get this straight:

Bill Maher does an excellent eight minute monologue on the media covering irrelevant things for the sake of clicks and agenda:

And then leads the overtime segment of that very same with a story about a Virginia school district that had renamed two schools named after confederates restoring the original names.

Because on a weekend when Joe Biden is withholding military aid to Israel to the point where even Jonah Goldberg’s friends are done with him there is no issue bigger that needs to be addressed than a school named after Stonewall Jackson who died in 1863.

I can’t contain my degree of shock that he might just be another self serving liberal after all.


Finally I laughed aloud when I saw this story out on the Daily Wire:

Speaking on the support that RFK Jr. enjoys from some on the political right, Penn said: “I think that it will drop in half if Republicans learn the views, right now they don’t know these things.”

“And there’s a group of Republicans that don’t like anybody and he’s now the alternative to the alternative,” he continued. “So he’s got some votes, but I agree with you, he would lose a lot of Republican votes if this screen that you’re putting up there really got out and got broadcast.”

Here is the video

So let me get this straight, Republican votes are going to be shocked SHOCKED that a President Candidate:

  • Whose Father was AG in a Democrat administration and ran for President as a Democrat
  • Whose uncle was a Democrat congressman, Senator and President
  • Whose other Uncle was a Democrat senator for 40+ years
  • Who has been a democrat all his life
  • And who initially attempted to run for the Democrat nomination

Might have a bunch of opinions that are completely consistent with the Democrat party?

My degree of surprise can’t be understated!

Let me tell you something Mr. Penn, any republican who votes for RFK doesn’t care what his opinions are. They just want to be able tell their republican friends at GOP events they didn’t vote for Biden and tell their celebrity friends at events attended by all the “right” people that they didn’t vote for Trump.

By John Ruberry

In terms of numbers and in geographic reach, America is possibly suffering from its worse outbreak of anti-Semitism ever. I’m referring of course to the pro-Hamas and anti-Israel protests at many colleges. Many of these “spontaneous” events are illegal encampments filled with similar tents, exact-copy signs, that are populated with angry students and other interlopers chanting the same slogans.

Fortunately, for now at least, the worst outrages at these hate rallies are isolated incidents.

Last month, a protester at George Washington University held a sign with a Palestinian flag and “the final solution.” At Columbia, a protest leader, the pronoun challenged Khymani James, was banned from campus after a video surfaced where, James declared, “Zionists don’t deserve to live.”

Also at Columbia, a knucklehead there screamed, “Go back to Poland, go back to Belarus” at pro-Israel counter protesters.

Can you imagine the uproar–it would be a well-deserved one–if someone screamed, “Go back to Africa” to Black protesters? The Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division would be there at Navy Seals speed.

The head of the Department of Justice is Merrick Garland, the US attorney general. When the situation fits, he likes to remind people that he is Jewish and had two members of his family perish in the Holocaust.

Last year, when questioned about the infamous FBI memo that suggested Catholics who favor traditional Latin mass services could connected to “the far-right white nationalist movement,” Garland responded emotionally. “The idea that someone with my family background would discriminate against any religion is so outrageous,” he said, “so absurd.”

In March, in an address to the left-leaning Anti-Defamation League’s Never is Now Summit, Garland was more specific about his family and the Holocaust.

“My family fled the pogroms of Eastern Europe at the start of the 20th century,” he said. “My grandmother, who was one of five children born in what is now Belarus, made it to the United States, as did two of her siblings.”

“The other two did not,” the AG continued. “They were killed in the Holocaust.”

Oh yeah, Belarus, the same place the hater at Columbia said, along with Poland, Jews should return to.

Garland is a native of Lincolnwood, Illinois, a Chicago suburb. He graduated–as class valedictorian-from Niles West High School in nearby Skokie. It was in Skokie, several years after Garland’s graduation, where Neo-Nazis attempted to march. Thousands of Holocaust survivors lived in Skokie at the time; Garland almost certainly was classmates with children of survivors of the Shoah.

Why hasn’t Garland specifically and forcefully spoken out against the anti-Semitism at these pro-Hamas protests? His boss, President Joe Biden, hasn’t either, of course.

When the time is right–or better, when the politics are right–Garland speaks out against anti-Semitism.

But is Garland even running the Justice Department? In the May 3rd Chicago Way podcast hosted by John Kass, the great Charles Lipson, a professor emeritus of political science from the University Chicago, had this to say about Garland: “The attorney general’s office right now is being running by a woman named Lisa Monaco, she’s the number two-person, Merrick Garland’s not doing anything.”

Well, he can do something now. Garland can unequivocally denounce the anti-Semitic protests at college campuses and the Biden administration’s weak response to them.

And then resign.

It’s up to Garland to convince me that he’s not a coward.

John Rubery regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

What is: “How do you know when a person’s national political career is toast?”

The story in question Is it time to ban pit bulls?:

Let’s take a look at the numbers. Between 2005 and 2017, at least 433 Americans were killed by dogs. And guess what? Pit bulls were responsible for a whopping 66% of these deaths. Pit bulls — a breed that makes up only 6% of the dog population in the U.S. — is causing the majority of fatal attacks.

It’s not even just humans who are suffering at the jaws of these dogs. In 2017 alone, pit bulls were responsible for the deaths of 13,000 dogs, 5,000 cats, and 20,000 horses and other farm animals.

Those are numbers Kristi Noem can only dream of.

I’m sorry but when you see this kind of joke in stories that begin with a police officer having to shoot a dog you’re finished politically whether you know it or not.

She might be able to be a Senator out of her state but VP or P not a chance.

As for the substance of the story in question, remember that the Pit Bull is so named because they were bred to fight in a pit:

The term “Pitbull” is derived from the dog breed that was utilized for bull-baiting, which took place in a “pit.” This violent sport involved pitting dogs against bulls, and the dogs were specifically bred for their strength, tenacity, and determination. This is why the name “Pitbull” became associated with these dogs.

Bull-baiting was a popular blood sport in the 19th century, particularly in the United Kingdom. The purpose was to test the dog’s ability to restrain and subdue a bull, which earned them a reputation as powerful and aggressive animals. Although bull-baiting was later outlawed, the association between Pitbulls and their historical past persisted.

I have no opinion on the matter one way or the other but for the record my next door neighbor has a Pit Bull called Kuz who greets me every day with loud barks and a wagging tail so I don’t know what end to believe. The dog absolutely loves DaWife.