The New Democrat Online

Life is a Highway

Life is a Highway
Source: QuoteAddicts.com

Tuesday, August 28, 2012

MLB Productions: MLB 1967: World Series Game 1: Red Sox @ Cardinals




The Red Sox had a great team in 1967 but so did the Cardinals, which is what made this World Series great. Carl Yastrzemski had two great opportunities to win World Series with the Red Sox in 1967 and 1975 but they played two great teams, Cardinals with Bob Gibson, Orlando Cepeda, Lou Brock and others. In 1967 and the Big Red Machine Reds in 1975 led by Sparky Anderson, with Johnny Bench, Joe Morgan, Pete Rose, Tony Perez and others. And lost both times in very close seven game series that were decided by a matter of plays rather then games.

USA Today Sports: Red Sox Reliever Banned From Team Plane to Anaheim

Red Sox reliever banned from team plane to Anaheim

The Soap Opera that is the 2012 Red Sox season continues

Sunday, August 26, 2012

Arizona Public Media: America Experience The Presidents: Jimmy Carter The Man From Plains

Source: Arizona Public Media-
Source: Arizona Public Media: American Experience The Presidents; Jimmy Carter

Had it not have been for 1974 and the Watergate scandal, Jimmy Carter doesn’t get elected President of the United States, at least in 1976. He probably runs for reelection for Governor of Georgia in 1974 and probably gets reelected and waits for 1980. And looks at his options then. Jimmy Carter, basically was in a time that was perfect for someone like him, after Watergate and President Nixon resigning in 1974. Americans were looking for decent honest person to lead the country.

Which is what President Gerry Ford was, but they were also looking for an outsider and a new voice that was not from Washington. Not a cabinet official, or someone in Congress, but a breath of fresh air, someone who wasn’t an elitist and someone who spoke their mind and could take the country on a different course. And perhaps end the gridlock in Washington and to a certain extent that’s what President Carter brought to Washington. He was able to pass a lot of legislation out of Congress.

Yes President Carter, had a Democratic Congress with large majorities, including a 3-5 majority in the Senate his first two years. But he was also able to get a lot of Congressional Republicans to vote for his legislation, because he worked with the Republican Leadership in the House and Senate. He probably actually had more Republican allies in Congress, than Democratic allies. He had problems with Congressional Democrats.

Former Senate Republican Leader Bob Dole who was in Congress during the Carter Administration, once said that Jimmy Carter was the smartest President he had ever served with, which might be true. But great intelligence and knowledge is a great thing to have as President, but you also have to have a political feel as a politician. You have to know what you want to do, where you want to take the country and how far you can take it, based on the political situation and what’s possible.

Which is something that President Carter didn’t have unlike President’s Reagan and Clinton and wasn’t sure how to communicate a message that he could get Americans to rally behind. And move Americans to get their Senators and Representatives behind him. He also had a Democratic Congress to deal with that was run by New Deal/Great Society Progressive/New Left Democrats, that since there was a Democratic President, automatically felt that it was time to move back to days of the Great Society and big government progressivism. And that wasn’t the type of Democrat that Jimmy Carter was.

President Carter, was ahead of his time in the Democratic Party in this sense. That he understood the limits of the Federal Government. And that there was only so much that it could do on its own to solve the nation’s problems and that it was time for a different approach. And even though his political feel wasn’t that good, he understood that by the late 1970s, that America had moved past the Progressive Era. And that Americans were ready for a different approach. Which also caused him problems with Congressional Democrats. So Jimmy Carter, ended up being a President with few allies in Washington, which made his job even more difficult.


USA Today Sports: For Dodgers and Red Sox, Deal could be a No-Win Situation

For Dodgers and Red Sox, deal could be a no-win situation

The Dodgers have the World Series on their mind

Saturday, August 25, 2012

Drew David: Jessica Savitch Intimate Portrait: The Queen of Nightly News

The Queen of Nightly News
Jessica Savitch before she tragically died in 1983, was the weekend anchor of NBC Nightly News. Only behind Tom Brokaw at NBC News as far as their anchors and when she died was considered the most trusted news anchor in America. Essentially replacing Walter Cronkite with that title. She was both gorgeous and adorable, but very intelligent and worked very hard at her craft. A true news junky, which is what you almost have to be to be a successful news anchor, as well as a political junky. All traits I love as someone who shares these same traits and she picked up these traits very early on in life, as being the daughter of a news and political junky her father, who she was very close with.

I wasn't born until 1975 so almost everything I've seen from her have been old news footage of her, actually a lot of it on YouTube. And she became a star in network news by the late 1970s, a very turbulent time in America. With an energy shortage, a weak economy, with high interest, inflation and unemployment rates, the Jonestown tragedy in 1978, the Iran Hostage Crisis. America seeming to be in decline by the summer of 1979 and Jessica Savitch was covering all of these stories.

Jessica Savitch was ahead of her time, because she made it to the top, or very close to it by the late 1970s. When network news was still dominated by men and when women were still coming up in this business and had she not died in 1983 tragically, maybe she's the lead anchor of one of the network newscasts for 15-20 years. Like Tom Brokaw, Peter Jennings, or Dan Rather. She was too big and too good to the weekend anchor indefinitely and could've gone a lot further, if she just had the time to do it.

USA Today Sports: Dodgers, Red Sox Close to Blockbuster Trade

Dodgers, Red Sox close to blockbuster trade

Looks like the Red Sox are cashing out

1940 GOP: Campaign Film Exposes The New Deal



Wendell Willkie a Classical Liberal speaking out against Big Government Progressivism

Thursday, August 23, 2012

Monday, August 20, 2012

Bob Parker: CBS News 1968- A Year That Changed America


Source: Bob Parker-CBS News: 1968, a Year That Changed America

I think one thing that separates America and makes us stronger than anyone else is that we can go through a year like 1968 and get through it and survive it. And still remain one country, unlike other countries that tend to go through such division between the people and their government and overall establishment of the country in one year and you see them come apart. With the government falling and perhaps even leading to some type of civil war. Egypt comes to mind pretty fast and what is going on in Syria and Venezuela right now are other good examples.

Having said all of that, its hard to find anything good about 1968 other than maybe the music and the fact that we started to get along better as far as race relations. Where racism and other types of bigotry started to really go out of style. And bigots were left to hide their bigotry or pay serious prices for it. But other than that 1968 was one big disaster after another. A year full of violence with murders and assassinations, the President of the United States deciding not to even bother running for reelection because there were so many people who literally hated him in both parties.

And that is just about the domestic scene in America, but then you go to the Vietnam War itself with Americans finally figuring out that we are not just losing the war, but it is probably lost. And we started seeing all of those dead American soldiers coming home from it. I guess one good thing about 1968 is that Americans finally woke up. And figured out that their government not only doesn’t always tell the truth, but they even lie to their people. The Johnson Administration saying that they were making progress in Vietnam when they knew the opposite was true and that Communist Vietnam was getting stronger.

1968 represents the 1960s as well as it could possibly be. A year of revolution, protest, violence, people coming together from multiple races to be part of the same movement. Where millions of Americans became free to be themselves and no long feel like they had to live a certain way of life in order to fit in or even be good people. 1968 was a shakeup of the entire United States and perhaps was something that the country needed. Even with all the violence and the lost of lives in that decade so Americans would know about the problems in the country, but also what could be done about them. And what also makes us great as a country which is our freedom and diversity.



USA Today: Madonna Sued in Russia for Supporting Gays

Madonna sued in Russia for supporting gays – USATODAY.com

Big Government running wild in Russia

USA Today Sports: Happy Birthday to Don King

Happy Birthday to Don King

Only in America

Sunday, August 19, 2012

Onion News: "GOP Trying To Keep Elderly Voting Base Alive Until November": What Won't The GOP Do To Win



Within the next ten years or so America will be a much younger, more diverse, ethnically and racially country that will be more Liberal-Libertarian more tolerant. As well with Generations X and Y and will be a country that will want less government in our lives, we are moving to becoming that country that Barry Goldwater. Wanted a Big Government out of our wallets and bedrooms country, which plays very well for Democrats, assuming the Progressives don't take over the party. Because Democrats play very well with Ethnic and Racial Minorities and have welcomed them into the party and support things like Comprehensive Immigration Reform. They have become the Civil Rights Party, which is what the Republican Party use to be and Republicans know this. And as the country is moving left, the GOP is moving right and becoming a more Authoritarian and Fascist Party. That has their own idea of what it means to be an American and what America is and if you don't fit into this box exactly. You don't speak the language a certain way or practice religion a certain way, don't like their forms of entertainment or like other forms of entertainment instead. Don't have the traditional family and so fourth, you are somehow Un American. And the GOP is not ready to move politically to accommodate new voters, they want to stick with their traditional base.

Instead of realizing this new reality and trying to adjust to it and use it as an opportunity, of how can we become a bigger party and bring in new voters. Neoconservative Republicans who now run the GOP, have gone in the opposite direction and looked for ways to make themselves smaller. But use that to not only remain competitive but to continue to win elections and have already written off these new voters as people who aren't going to vote Republican. And have decided, that if they aren't going to vote Republican, they aren't going to vote at all. Thats exactly what Voter ID is all about, the more accurate way to describe Voter ID, is to call it the Democratic Voter Prevention Act. How do we prevent African and Latin American voters, a well as young people from voting at all, because if these voters turnout and vote. They will almost certainly vote Democratic and costs Neoconservatives seats in Congress and other elections.

So sure if we can prevent seniors in places like Florida as well as minorities who tend to be Democratic from voting. What's the next logical step, I know keep seniors who tend to be Republican from dying, so we can keep these votes alive so to speak, while we are preventing others from voting at all. I guess if you are desperate enough, you'll do anything to win, even save lives to save votes and prevent others from voting to save votes against.

David Von Pein: The Zapruder Film is Shown on Goodnight America With Geraldo Rivera- MARCH 6, 1975

I don't believe there is any question who assassinated President John F. Kennedy. That man is obviously Lee Harvey Oswald. He had the access, the motive, the ability, his gun was the gun that killed President Kennedy, his fingerprints were on the gun. If he ever made it to trial he would have had to pleaded guilty to have any shot in hell (where he's currently residing) to have any shot in hell of avoiding the death penalty. That is not the question as far as who actually killed President Kennedy. And for anyone who disagrees with that, you really should treat them as if they're mental patients, or liars like Roger Stone to use as an example. Whose probably made millions from his books with his own JFK assassination conspiracy theories. 

The only question for me is did anyone else put Lee Oswald up to the assassination  and then used him as their patsy. Knowing he was going to get caught and probably given the death penalty as a result, but Oswald agreed to do it anyway. Jack Kennedy, had a lot of enemies in Texas and Dallas perhaps especially both on the Far-Left where Oswald represented as a Marxist. But on the Far-Right for his support for civil and equal rights for African-Americans. And for his economic liberalism and wanting to use government to create new economic opportunity for people who needed it. But from organized crime especially the Italian Mafia, because of his administration's crackdown on organized crime. Jack Ruby, who killed Oswald had organize crime connections as well. Which just ignites the organize crime theory behind the JFK assassination. 

We know, at least anyone who both has a brain and is sane at the same time, which is an accomplishment unfortunately for too many Americans, who assassinated President John Kennedy. The question was there anyone else involved or not. Was this something that was just put together by a highly intelligent and sharp man who was also deranged and a loser all in the same person. Or did he not only have help as far as actually pulling off the assassination with a second shooter and have people behind them that put the hit out and hired them to do it. Was Oswald the lone shooter, but was hired by others to assassinate the President. These are the questions that I at least and a lot of other intelligent sane Americans don't have the answers to yet. Which is why speculation in this case still goes on. And how the Roger Stone's of the world make their money. 



USA Today Sports: USC brushes off sanctions to be No. 1 in AP Top 25

USC brushes off sanctions to be No. 1 in AP Top 25 – USATODAY.com

The Trojans are back on top where they are accustomed to being

Friday, August 17, 2012

History Day: Iran Hostage Crisis Documentary 4th in State

President Jimmy Carter-
What a crazy time for America and Iran. The Iranian people were fed up with their dictatorial authoritarian government that they had in Iran under the Shah that both the United Kingdom and United States backed for almost forty years and even installed in Iran. So what you had was a bunch of Islamic theocratic revolutionaries under Ruhollah Khomeini decided to stand up and the Shah knew he no longer had the authority to lead his country and decided to leave his country. Which left a power shortage in Iran with a new Islamic theocratic government under Supreme Leader Khomeini coming into place.

And because America had backed the Shah for so long and President Jimmy Carter saying that the Shah was such a fine leader and good man for Iran, these Iranian revolutionaries decided to take out their frustration and anger on what was left of American involvement in Iran which was our embassy there. And took about hundred American U.S. embassy employees hostage. Which is how the Iranian hostage crisis started. Which was essentially the end of Jimmy Carter as a strong leader in America, or even having the potential of being a strong leader of the United States. Because now America looked weak compared to a third-world country and was held hostage.

Sunday, August 12, 2012

America's Game 1991 Washington Redskins: The Last Chapter of Greatness For The Redskins



To talk about the 1991 Redskins, I think you have to at least be familiar with the Joe Giibs era in Washington and what happened in the previous ten years. The Redskins won the 2nd most games in the NFL in the 1980s, including two Super Bowl Championships and three NFC Conference Championships. Including four NFC Eastern Division Championships and twelve NFC Playoff games and did all of this while playing in a great Division in the NFC East. Where basically every team every year in this period was good enough to make the NFC Playoffs. And is a big reason why every team in the NFC East not only dislikes each other, because how important these games are every week in the NFC East. Because each of these teams know when they play a game in the NFC East, that if they don't play well, they'll probably lose. So this is the environment that the Redskins were playing in and all they did basically was win every week, not go undefeated of course but they won a lot. And as a result were expected to be not good, not very good but great every season. So when the Redskins struggled in 1988 after winning their 2nd Super Bowl in six years in 1987 and missed the NFC Playoffs again in 1989. Redskins fans were seeing something they hadn't in ten years, miss the NFC Playoffs in back to back seasons. Which made 1990 important and 1991 was basically finishing the job that was started in 1990.

In 1990 the Redskins were good but not great, 10-6 kinda snuck in the NFC Playoffs, beat their NFC East Rival Philadelphia Eagles. In the NFC Wild Card at Philadelphia, two teams that were really starting to hate each other and beat them bad 20-7 at the Vet, just a few months after the Body Bag game at the Vet. Which was basically the highlight of that season because they go to San Francisco and get beat badly by a better 49ers team the defending Super Bowl Champion, the score was like 28-10 or something. As far as the 1991 Redskins, I've been a Redskins fan since 1991 and absolutely love this franchise and the 1991 Redskins were a great team and one of the best ever, complete team on both sides of the ball. With great coaching on both sides of the ball but out of the forty five Super Champions in NFL History, they are ranked fourteen out of forty five. Which is good in the top third but we are not talking about one of the top five or even top ten teams of all time.

One of the reasons why the 1991 Redskins aren't ranked higher, I believe has to do a lot with their schedule. The 1983 Redskins I believe are the best team that Joe Gibbs ever had in Washington and they lost the Super Bowl to the Raiders. But that team scored something like 550 points and did this against one of the toughest schedules in the league that year. Including playing the Cowboys twice, the Raiders twice, I believe the 49ers twice, the Rams twice. All of these teams were playoff teams that year and in the Raiders case beat the Redskins in the Super Bowl that year. Whereas the 1991 Redskins played a very weak schedule, including playing the Atlanta Falcons and Detroit Lions twice, both NFC Playoff teams but teams that had mediocre talent and played weak schedules that year and benefited that year. The two losses the Redskins had that year were against an up incoming but inferior Cowboys team and an Eagles team that missed the NFC Playoffs that year.

If figuring out who are the greatest if not the greatest team of all time, was about won loss record and point scored and given up and all of that. Then the 1991 Redskins would be one of the best if not the best team of all time, because they just didn't beat teams that year, they destroyed them. But a lot if not most of the blowout victories they had that year, were against teams they should've whipped and destroyed, so base on the talent and what the Redskins did with their talent. The 1991 Redskins are a great team they just shouldn't be in the conversation as one of the best ever.

Saturday, August 11, 2012

David Von Pein: Theodore H. White- The Making of a President 1960



The 1960 United States presidential campaign was one of the best ever, because of who ran for President. The Democratic Party nominated the best person they had in Senator John Kennedy and the Republican Party nominated the best person they had in Vice President Richard Nixon. It was literally the best vs the best. Two men that represented the now and future of their party, who were the leaders of their party. It gave American voters a clear choice in who to select to be the next President and who to be the next President early in the Cold War with the Soviet Union.

It gave people another choice as well. Do we want to continue to do what we were doing as a country. Have the Federal Government stay the course and not make any big changes, or do we want to try a different path. Senator Kennedy tried and I believe was successful in making the argument that America was stagnating not moving and advancing as fast as it could. And that Vice President Nixon represented this conservative approach of not moving real fast, staying back and seeing how things develop. Where Vice President Nixon tried to make the argument that America wasn’t ready to chart a different course.

Dick Nixon didn’t want to chart a course with a somewhat young and inexperienced Senator that had never been an executive before. Thats the choice that America had for President in 1960. What Jack Kennedy represented for the country was a true vision of where he wanted to take the country and how we would get there. Making the argument that America was sitting still in the 1950s under President Eisenhower who was somewhat conservative. And that the country wasn’t advancing fast enough. And sitting still and even falling behind.

The recession of the late 1950s helped Senator Kennedy make the case that its time to move again. And Dick Nixon President Eisenhower’s loyal and influential Vice President represented the conservative wing of the Republican Party. Vice President Nixon I believe didn’t do much to counter this argument or defend himself. But what he did instead was try to make this campaign about Jack Kennedy’s youth and inexperience. Even though they both came to Congress the same time in 1947 to the House and were friends there. And remained friends when Nixon became Vice President in 1953 and Kennedy was elected to the Senate the same year. And Nixon was only four years older and were in the same generation.

One difference between Jack Kennedy and Dick Nixon, was that Kennedy did offer the country a change of course. That would finish off what was created in the 1930s with the New Deal. But in a different way, focusing on health care, civil rights and tax cuts. Making the case the country was overtaxed. Where I believe Nixon didn’t have what’s called the vision thing, at least in 1960. He developed that by 1968 when he was elected President. But 1960 for him was, “this is what’s been working, so lets continue what we’ve done.”


Friday, August 10, 2012

Icna Chicago: The Life of Malcolm X

Freedom Fighter
This piece was originally posted at FRS FreeState: Icna Chicago: The Life of Malcolm X

Malcolm X, represents to me many ways what the American Dream and what that is and should be. Someone who started from very rough beginnings, essentially came from nothing and worked his way up in life. And got so far, that people actually saw him as a threat, or his message of freedom and responsibility, not just for African-Americans, but for all Americans, as threats. By the time he died, he believed that people should be judged as people. Who moved towards Dr. Martin King when it came to civil rights. By the time he died, even as a young man he was in prison and at one point was even a racist. He saw all Caucasians as racists or “White Devils”, and not just as people and not just the people. And not just the racists, but all Caucasians.

But once Malcolm left prison and left the Nation of Islam, he got himself educated and started hanging out with Caucasians that weren’t racist and believed in similar things. And learned better and that perhaps he could work with them so they could all accomplish the same things. That all Americans should be treated equally under law and not be held down because of their race. I wrote a blog arguing this a few months ago. But Malcolm X’s message was about freedom and responsibility. That people shouldn’t expect to be given things. That if we wanted to achieve anything in life and be successful, that we had to go out and achieve those things and not settle for failure.

That people, shouldn’t settle for poverty, or anything else. That the way to avoid these things, were to go out and get ourselves educated, work hard and be productive. Rather than expect government, or anyone else to hand us those things. Which is why I believe if Malcolm X were alive today, he would be a classical Liberal Democrat or Conservative, not exactly registered to either party. But he would have that mindset, that people shouldn’t expect government, or other people to take care of themselves. But they needed to be able to do that for themselves, if they expected to be successful in life. Had both Malcolm X and Martin King lived a natural life, meaning they didn’t die at a young age and lived into their senior years and not have been murdered, or killed, but died through natural causes, America would be a much different country and not just for African-Americans. Both of them would’ve helped a lot of people who weren’t free to live their own lives. Be able to achieve those things for themselves by preaching the message of individual freedom and personal responsibility through education.


Sunday, August 5, 2012

Pennebaker Hegedus: The War Room 1993, The Story of Bill Clinton For President



Source: Pennebaker Hegedus-James Carville-
Source: Pennebacker Hegedus: The War Room 1993 Trailer

In 1991-92 I guess was the time that I started getting into politics to the point that I was actually following the news about it. I was 16 and a sophomore in high school and I saw a speech I believe on C-SPAN. I became a political junky pretty early in life and I was actually watching C-SPAN and saw a speech from then Governor Bill Clinton from Arkansas. And he was talking about how we could make college more affordable in America, an issue we are still talking about twenty-years later.

And Governor Clinton was talking about an idea called AMERICORE, where people would get tax credits, or be able to go to college at no financial cost to them, if they serve their country. They work in community service, join the military, become a teacher, work in law enforcement, become a doctor etc. Another words be able to go to college if they give back and serve their country. And this program that was enacted shortly after he became President in 1993 and he was able to inspire thousands if not millions of Americans to volunteer for their country. And in return would be able to go to college and when I heard this speech, it gave me the sense that Bill Clinton was a winner, a Democrat who could actually get elected President of the United States.

Listening to Bill Clinton’s speech and following his presidential campaign, gave me the idea that Bill Clinton was a different Democrat. Someone whose called a New Democrat, someone who doesn’t just believe in growing the Federal Government and raising new taxes to pay for it. And by doing this, that would automatically solve whatever problem the program was intended to solve. But that you had to make the Federal Government work and be able to reform or eliminate things in the Federal Government that wasn’t working.

That Clinton’s presidential campaign was about the people not government. How do you make government work for the people, so it empowers the people who need to be empowered. Not growing government to take care of people but using it in a way so the people who need it can take care of themselves instead, which are two different concepts. Americans were looking for a change in 1992, that’s clear with a bad economy, lack of economic and gob growth.

Americans saw President Bush as out of touch and not up to the job of turning the country around and were looking for a change. But weren’t sure they were ready to turn it over to the Democrats. People who have been stereotyped as big government tax and spenders and weren’t interested in seeing new tax hikes. But want to go back to work and take care of themselves. And what they got from Bill Clinton was a new Democratic voice, someone who could talk about liberalism and communicate it in a way that made it about people and not government.

Bill Clinton had this saying that people who collected public assistance will no longer be able to get it for free in a Clinton Administration. That people on public assistance were going to be expected to use that time to prepare themselves to go to work and serve their communities. Bill Clinton’s political hero is Jack Kennedy, same as mind along with Bill Clinton and a few other people. And of course one of President Kennedy’s famous lines is, ask not what government can do for you, but what you can do for your country. And I believe Bill Clinton took that to heart and made that a big part of his presidential campaign and a bigger part of his Presidency and it worked very well.



Saturday, August 4, 2012

Associated Press: Raw Video- Marilyn Monroe Remembered by Stars

Source: Associated Press- 
Source: Associated Press: Raw Video- Marilyn Monroe Remembered by The Stars

If you are going to look at the life of entertainer Marilyn Monroe who died at the very young age of 36, the same age I am today, but back in 1962 And you can get past the goddess parts of Marilyn Monroe, which I admit is very difficult, to me at least she’s the best looking women whose ever lived, whose not related to me, you are talking about the sexy baby of all sexy babies. The sexy baby that all Sexy Babies are measured by. Extremely hot, baby-face adorable, didn’t even look 36, more like 22.

And of course with one of the greatest if not greatest bodies a women has ever had. She looked like an athlete like a tennis player or something, but if you are able to get past all of that, I believe you’ll see a very talented, but somewhat lost women. Who lacked self-confidence and perhaps was never very happy. Which is interesting to me because she married someone who had similar issues in Joe DiMaggio. One of the top 3-5 baseball players of all time, but who perhaps never appreciated that.

Marilyn Monroe wasn’t a bimbo, perhaps not very knowledgeable or very interested in things outside of the entertainment industry. But someone who was very good at her craft who didn’t work very hard at it. She was famous for missing rehearsal’s, not showing up for events. Not being very professional, but she was very good at her craft. She didn’t have to work very hard at it. She was someone who was very funny like in the movie the Seven Year Itch.

And funny in person as well and she could also act. Either be a comedian or a dramatic actress and she could also sing and perform. She wasn’t an actress or a singer, but an entertainer. Perhaps so good at her craft and then you throw in her physical attractiveness, she seemed to have everything going for her. But apparently there was something missing that she wasn’t able to accomplish which is what brought her down.

They say genius’ are somewhat troubled because as brilliant as they are about somethings. They devote so much time those direct areas that they don’t have much else going for them and seem very mediocre in other areas. Like a nerd who knows everything about lets say chemistry but couldn’t tell you their favorite movie or something because they don’t have one or don’t watch any movies or something and seem somewhat unsatisfied. I’m not saying Marilyn was a genius, but she had some of those characteristics.