president

Sheepdog David Grant’s 19th Annual Academy Awards Contest Results!!!

THE BROADCAST

We live in a very different America than we did last year.  While there has always been angst regarding the Academy Awards acting as a platform for political views, we had never had a sitting president call Meryl Streep “overrated” before.  After her comments at The Golden Globes – which could basically be boiled down to: Please stop bullying Hollywood, foreigners, the press, and handicapped people, Mr. President – Trump supporters vowed to boycott the Oscars.  This shouldn’t be too surprising to anyone who is paying attention.  The right have long derided “the left coast,” and now they finally have an administration eager to end funding to the arts.

A lot of people were expecting heavy political messages this year, and there were a couple.  When Iran’s “The Salesman” won Best Foreign Language Film, a statement was read by the filmmaker, who refused to come to America as long as we have a president that has openly discussed a “Muslim ban.”  While presenting, Gael Garcia Bernal told a truth about how all those in the film industry are migrant workers who go to other countries to craft their work.  And several jokes were made that teased at the division in our country.  Overall, however, it was kind of lite on hardline statements.

Normally I would do a segment entitled “On a Very Special Episode Of…” that goes in depth into the greater theme the broadcast seemed to be on a crusade to discuss, but it fits in so nicely here.  The reality is that they were going for something more mainstream and neutral this year, aiming to please as many people while spreading out the monolog throughout the program and keeping a tight schedule.  It worked pretty well, but it would have been rather unforgettable had Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway not announced La La Land as Best Picture when Moonlight had actually won.

But there were two themes that did come up.

The first was not a new one.  We’ve seen it a lot since 9/11, actually.  And the year that there was controversy surrounding the rise of superhero movies, the perceived decline of films with depth, and fans that were upset that The Dark Knight was snubbed, the Academy went to extra lengths to elevate the films that were actually given the nod, going as far as to have host Hugh Jackman use his Wolverine street-cred to sing a song in his opening monologue about the subject.  Movies are important.  Storytelling is important.  Film is an important industry, not just for the American economy but for the world’s.

The second was only lightly touched on, but it’s exactly what I thought they should have focused on.  You see, in calling for others to boycott the Oscars, the Trumpeters said things like, “Why do we give awards to actors and not the real heroes?”  First, we do, and if it made for good T.V., you better believe they would air it.  It should go without saying that Hollywood is indeed rewarding the best work in their industry, but their industry routinely pays tribute to real-world heroes.  Captain “Sully” Sullenberg.  Desmond Doss.  The hidden figures that put a man on the moon.  People who adopt and raise children.  Not to mention all the real-world heroes in the documentary subjects!  By bringing famed scientist Katherine Johnson, who Taraji P. Henson played in Hidden Figures, onto the stage to a standing ovation, the point was made.

“Movies about the lives of men and women in the history books have long been a staple of storytellers,” Monae told the audience. “Sometimes the names and deeds of the heroes in those films are known to all.”

oscar-tweet-01

THE BEST ACCEPTANCE SPEECH

The best acceptance speech for an Oscar this year was not during this broadcast.  It actually came from Jackie Chan, who won a lifetime achievement award during an earlier ceremony.  You can watch that speech here.

However, if we’re just looking at the televised ceremony, then the winner would be Viola Davis, who extolled the storytellers to “exhume those bodies.”  You can see that here.

oscar-tweet-02

 

ALSO DEAD:

They always leave people off the memoriam.  This year, the following people were missing:

alexis-arquette

Alexis Arquette (actor)

florence-henderson

Florence Henderson (actor)

direland17

Dan Ireland (producer)

Jon Polito.jpg

Jon Polito (actor)

GALLERY

Dorris Roberts (actor)

gary-shandling

Garry Shandling (actor, comedian)

robert-vaughn

Robert Vaughn (actor)

 

NOT DEAD:

janet-patterson

Producer, Jan Chapman, whose picture was mistakenly used for costume designer Janet Patterson.

janet-patterson-02

 

A SPECIAL TRIBUTE:

ken-howard

Known for The White Shadow, 1776, Rambo, 30 Rock, and 105 other credits, Ken Howard was also the President of SAG/AFTRA, Chancellor of the National Kidney Foundation, a board member of the Los Angeles Alzheimer’s Committee, a board member of Shambala Animal Preserve, and a national spokesperson for the Onyx and Breezy Foundation.  I had the pleasure of knowing him a little during my tenure at Kent State. He was attending the graduate program and taught a few classes that I was in. He coached me in a couple of monologues.  He was a no-nonsense kind of guy that was very particular about what he considered good acting.  He ended one class with an open q & a. The rest of the class kind of waited, unsure of what to ask and looking to each other to break the ice. I put my hand up right away and asked him about working with Sylvester Stallone.  He chuckled and told a few good-natured stories.  That got things going.

RIP, Ken.

 

oscar-tweet-03

MY FAVORITE PART OF THE SHOW

Bringing his favorite running gag from his late night show to the Academy Awards broadcast, Jimmy Kimmel made a lot of jokes at Matt Damon’s expense.  He has been his supposed arch-nemesis ever since he ended an episode with bad guests by quipping, “My apologies to Matt Damon.  We ran out of time.”  Upping the ante, former girlfriend Sarah Silverman surprised Jimmy with a music video for “I’m F#$%ing Matt Damon” and then taking it to a whole new level with his own response, “I’m F@#$ing Ben Affleck,” the fake-feud has led to a lot of great TV moments.

So. . .  After the insane confusion with the Best Picture mix-up, I had a lot of fun with my live Tweets.

oscar-tweet-04

oscar-tweet-05oscar-tweet-06oscar-tweet-07

SCORE BOARD:

0 Correct Answers 0%
Nobody  
1 Correct Answer 4.1666%
Nobody  
2 Correct Answers 8.333%
Nobody  
3 Correct Answers 12.4999%
Nobody  
4 Correct Answers 16.666%
Tarah Hamilton  
5 Correct Answers 20.8333%
Nobody  
6 Correct Answers 24.999%
Elizabeth “E.J.” Jackson  
7 Correct Answers 29.1666%
Matt Ratz  
8 Correct Answers 33.333%
Jamie Mank  
Ann Murdock  
9 Correct Answers 37.4999%
Nobody  
10 Correct Answers 41.666%
Mike Maletic  
Leigh Ann Spratt  
11 Correct Answers 45.8333%
“Shawny” Shawn Page  
12 Correct Answers 49.999%
Regan Page  
David Shoemaker  
13 Correct Answers 54.1666%
Brian Stevens  
14 Correct Answers 58.333%
Victoria Leduc  
15 Correct Answers 62.4999%
David Grant  
Stella Ingram  
16 Correct Answers 66.666%
???????  
17 Correct Answers 70.8333%
Nobody  
18 Correct Answers 74.999%
Nobody  
19 Correct Answers 79.1666%
Nobody  
20 Correct Answers 83.333%
Nobody  
21 Correct Answers 87.4999%
Nobody  
22 Correct Answers 91.666%
Nobody  
23 Correct Answers 95.8333%
Nobody  
24 Correct Answers 100%
Nobody  

 

WALL OF FAME

1999 – Elizabeth Grant

2000 – Eric Fox

2001 – Jillaine Gill

2002 – Eric Fox, Nate Hodges, and Drew Lerman– 13 correct guesses (no tie breaker)

2003 – Eric Fox– 15 correct guesses

2004 – Kevin Schwendeman– 20 correct guesses

2005 – Nate Hodges– 16 correct guesses

2006 – Jes Antolik and Leigh Ann Spratt — 14 correct guesses (Leigh Ann won the tie breaker)

2007 – Jillaine Gill — 16 correct guesses

2008 – Rock Shaink Jr — 14 correct guesses

2009 – Benjamin Crusoe — 18 correct guesses

2010 – Holly Elswick — 17 correct guesses

2011 – Elizabeth Grant — 17 correct guesses

2012 – Christian Hodges and Kevin Schwendeman — 18 correct guesses (Christian won the tie breaker)

2013 – Sheepdog David Grant — 19 correct guesses

2014 – Sheepdog David Grant — 21 correct guesses

2015 – Brian Stevens — 20 correct guesses

2016 – Holly Elswick and Brian Stevens — 17 correct guesses

 

AND THE WINNER IS…

With 16 correct guesses…

 

holly-elswick

Holly Elswick!!!

VOTER’S GUIDE – Hillary Clinton

politics-header

NOTE: The views and opinions expressed in this are purely my own.  I simply want to expound upon my political thoughts regarding this year’s election, and I hope that there’s someone out there that finds this of interest.

If you’d like to read about the third party candidates, go here.  If you’d like to hear my thoughts on the Republican candidate, go here.  If you’re interested in knowing more about California’s propositions and measures, go here.

But for now, let’s take a closer look at the Democratic candidate, shall we?

hillary-01

Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Has there been a more controversial candidate in my lifetime? And why is she so much of a lightning rod? Certainly, there is SOME validity when her supporters say that her critics are acting out of a misogynistic worldview. When her opponent, for example, says she “doesn’t look presidential” or when inarticulate Trump supporters say “there’s just something about her,” they are likely referring to the fact that she’s not like our previous presidents. You know, she’s not a dude. It’s kind of like the lizard brain comments that members of white America have made about our current president. “He’s obviously not American.” Eek!

But there’s got to be more to it than hatred because she’s a female Ghostbuster, right? I mean, look at all of the scandals that she and her husband have been accused of! And that’s kind of the key for me. “She and her husband.” People that say that every witch hunt Hillary has endured is because she’s a woman miss the point. It’s because the Clintons – both Bill and Hill – are deemed untrustworthy by at least a portion of the population.

But here’s the thing, a part of me wants to forget about Bill and rage against the patriarchy, because it DOES exist. And it has been unfair to not only Mrs. Clinton but to a lot of women. I remember when she was first lady and people were complaining that she was too uppity and should know her place, sit down, shut up, and worry about things like the color of the curtains in the first bedroom and flowers on the side of the interstate like our previous first ladies. I remember being young and dumb in the 1990s and making jokes about her appearance and teasing my conservative buddies, suggesting they should ask Chelsea Clinton to the prom. I hear how people talk about Hillary to this day and note that it’s not the same way they talk about men in the same position. Regardless of how much they hate a man’s politics, they don’t say he’s catty or shrill or on his period. Talk about a vote to blow up the system!! Can I vote for an overweight, handicapped, non-English speaking, vegetarian Native American lesbian already?!

If you’ve been paying attention, Hillary is a two-faced career politician that will resort to underhanded tactics to get where she wants. This is true of all two-faced career politicians that will resort to underhanded tactics to get where they want. This leaves us with two questions:

1) Do you want a two-faced career politician that will resort to underhanded tactics to get where they want?

2) Are the rules different for Hillary?

And my answer?

1) As a centrist, I can answer that question for a lot of you. I’ve been paying attention and puking in my mouth every time you say it. Yes, you do. As long as they are on your side of the aisle, and before you get mad at me and say that isn’t true, ask yourself one little question. Have you ever justified the actions of your candidate by shrugging and saying this? “Well, they all lie. That’s why he HAS TO lie.” If you’re a Democrat or a Republican, of course you have. I don’t even know you, and I’ve heard you say it. Stop being disingenuous.

2) Just look at the undercover videos. Despite the fact that Hillary’s “political maneuverings” are essentially the plot line of every election movie in history, she has undergone severe scrutiny that is unprecedented.

Now, I just want to take a moment to clarify my position on this. I think these tactics are absolutely disgusting. They are the bane of our political process, and when you combine it with the entertainment journalism of the mainstream media and our animal instincts to be attracted to violence, you end up with stupid choices based on emotional responses to guys dressed up in Donald Duck costumes and street fights in front of political rallies. If you’re reading my opinions, you’ll probably see that I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican. There is no one that I can feel good voting for; partially because I want something that can’t exist in our money-fueled political system. I puke when you shrug off your candidate’s lies, because I am waiting for the candidate with enough integrity, determination, and grit to tell the truth and stand up for their convictions. And that person’s “truth” sure as hell had better not just be that “Rosie O’Donnell is disgusting.”

Alright, back to Hillary.

Let’s set aside the controversy for a moment and focus on her policies. I know that might be hard for some of you, but I don’t want to talk about Benghazi or e-mails or Chinese businessmen in the Lincoln bedroom. I really don’t want to talk about real estate deals from before I was in middle school. I just included them here for the purposes of search engines, and I’m done now. 🙂

Hillary is a hawk when it will get her your vote. She’ll talk about raising the minimum wage if she thinks it will cure your Bern with an “I’m with her” yard sign. She will remind you over and over again that she was part of the team that took down bin Laden, because you probably voted for Bush hoping that he would, and she’s hoping you will remember that when you’re in the polling station. Of course there are certain issues that she will never bend on, and some of those are serious issues that I know a lot of us disagree with her on. But overall, because she’s a two-faced career politician that will do anything to get what she wants, she actually cares about what the voters want, and as much as I hate to admit it, one of the things I value in a leader is that they listen to what their followers want and/or need.

Hm. Did I just endorse Hillary Clinton for president? I think I might have. At least one of her two-faces.

hillary-02

VOTER’S GUIDE – Third Party Candidates in the Presidential Election 2016

politics header.png

NOTE: The views and opinions expressed in this are purely my own.  I simply want to expound upon my political thoughts regarding this year’s election, and I hope that there’s someone out there that finds this of interest.

If you’d like to read about the Republican candidate, go here.  If you’d like to hear my thoughts on the Democratic candidate, go here.  If you’re interested in knowing more about California’s propositions and measures, go here.

 

First of all, I think it’s funny that the California ballot pretends this is more than just a two party run. It barely qualifies, so why not put the two major parties at the top? It isn’t alphabetic. Is it by when they registered? If so, wouldn’t Hillary be on the page before the nominees are listed? She’s been running for president since she was 8.

Ahem.

Let’s not rule out the other three parties. Let’s examine them seriously.

 

third-party-01

La Riva is very much against war, calling Clinton a war hawk and accusing her husband of being a war criminal as a result of the bombings in Kosovo and Bosnia. She’s the true “blow-up the system” candidate. She wants to change everything and work towards absolute equality. She is on the ballot in only a few states (Vermont, New Mexico, Iowa, Louisiana, Colorado, Washington, New Jersey, and California), and is the founder of her party. She previously had been a member of other parties and had tried to get the nomination through one of them, losing to Ralph Nader. While I admire her advocacy for social justice, I see her overall political views to be too radical for this moment in time. Realistically, a vote here would be valuable only as a protest against the two party system that sends a message that you want a more socialist agenda. If she were to actually become president, I would have serious concerns about how well she could play with others.

third-party-02

Stein ran against Hillary before. I bet you didn’t know that? She was the Green Party candidate in 2012, but since this election has been such a dreamboat for America, she’s getting a lot more buzz as an alternative this time around. If you were upset that neither of the major candidates seem to be focusing on climate change enough, then this is your platform. They want to declare a state of emergency on the environment and get to work. Stein is the organic, clean fuel, environmental candidate, so much so that she has drawn criticism for her stance on GMOs and vaccines. She’s also a jobs advocate, believes health care and education are rights, wants to try to end poverty, and wants to reform the judicial, veteran, and immigration systems. While the Democratic Party likes to think of themselves as the place for idealists, they tend to attract pragmatic progressives who don’t think the Green Party has a chance at actually winning. Stein’s priorities are very specific to fixing what her party perceives as being broken, and unfortunately that narrow point of view has made her into a sort of pariah. With not much chance of making it to The White House, this is the team you vote for if you want to send a message that you care about the environment more than you do about party politics.

third-party-03

It’s kind of interesting how much The Libertarian nominees are discredited as totally incompetent when you take into account the fact that both Johnson and Weld have been governors. Their platform is the ultimate hands-off approach to governance. If you want to know their stance on abortion or drugs or even education, it’s basically that people should be able to make their own choices without government interference. They do, however, have some areas that they find important enough to get involved in, such as criminal justice reform, wasteful spending, and term limits. There does seem to be an inherent flaw in the ideology, in my opinion. The official platform for education says, “Governors Gary Johnson and Bill Weld believe nothing is more important to our future as a country than educating our next generations.” However, making education a priority and then saying that you will “end the department of education” seems like a contradiction. Or maybe I just don’t get it. Also, saying that the free market rights itself is a worry. The free market is driven by low costs, which has led to historical slavery and environmental destruction. Whole species of animals have been “righted” by the free market, and despite the fact that conscientious people know that child labor is used in creating their smart phones, they still buy them. The only thing that protects the most vulnerable from being exploited is intervention on behalf of the people (ie government). So I don’t personally favor Libertarian ideology, but then again, I don’t really know exactly what they stand for. Johnson got booed at the Libertarian Convention for suggesting that maybe it’s a good idea to actually test people for competence behind the wheel before letting them drive. In a party so divided that the merits of a driver’s license is a hot topic of debate, it’s hard to say what a Libertarian actually believes, and since Johnson often gives non-committal answers or sounds uninformed on various topics, it is really hard to see what he personally stands for. I guess the point in 2016 isn’t so much to consolidate the party’s platform into one cohesive model so much as to confront what some voters perceive to be a broken system. Again, with little actual chance of moving into the beltway of Washington this election cycle, this is a protest vote. Libertarians tend to either be disenfranchised Republicans or disenfranchised Democrats, proving that the two party system is so poor at representing people that the one thing people running from both parties can agree on is that they hate the two party system.

VOTER’S GUIDE – DONALD J. TRUMP

politics-header

NOTE: The views and opinions expressed in this are purely my own.  I simply want to expound upon my political thoughts regarding this year’s election, and I hope that there’s someone out there that finds this of interest.

If you’d like to read about the third party candidates, go here.  If you’d like to hear my thoughts on the Democratic candidate, go here.  If you’re interested in knowing more about California’s propositions and measures, go here.

But for now, let’s take a closer look at the Republican candidate, shall we?

trump-01

Interestingly enough, Donald J. Trump is also a protest vote. I said earlier this year that Trump voters aren’t that much different than Sanders voters. They are both mainly made up by working class people who think that their jobs are threatened. But whereas Bernie’s people wanted to compete with highly educated immigrants by reforming higher education in this country, Trump supporters are mainly concerned with competing with immigrants for lower paying, more unskilled labor. The biggest difference between them is where they focus their rage.

Bernie Sanders supporters were indignant at a system that they feel has let them down. Education costs being one of the biggest issues, they were also worried about rising health costs, disappearing social security, and social injustices and inequality. They are angry at the government for letting them down, and interestingly enough given the age of their beloved candidate, the older generation’s excess.

Donald Trump supporters are also mad at the government, particularly the current administration, but they are also angry at the people that threaten “the American way of life.” This is where the worry sets in, because a lot of what they say regarding this subject is either racist or sounds an awful like it is. The really worrisome aspect of this is that what they are saying has been empowered by the candidate himself.

Donald Trump’s temperament is a huge problem. He’s obsessed with getting into silly flame wars on Twitter and making cheap jokes about D-list celebrities. Probably because he himself is basically a D-list celebrity. He’s the guy you cast when you want cameo of a rich guy in your movie, but if it’s more than a couple of lines, you better call Christopher McDonald or Craig Kilborn.

It’s important to understand how Donald Trump sees the world. He is a deal maker, a business man. He sees things in a transaction-oriented manner. What can I get from you to make this worth it for me? When we went to war in Iraq, he thought it was a smart investment, because we could take their oil reserves. We don’t need to protect Japan and South Korea, because they should just get their own nuclear weapons and protect themselves. Theoretically, this works in the business realm, although it is often said that Trump doesn’t like to follow through on his arrangements, refusing to pay for services rendered and shortchanging his wives in their prenup agreements. How well would quid pro quo at best or the art of welching on the deal at worst serve the U.S. in foreign relations? It would probably destabilize Asia and gain us the reputation of being colonial war criminals.

As to domestic affairs, Trump is a guy who says he will close the loopholes that he benefited from as a “smart” businessman, but he hasn’t proposed any policy that would do so. Instead, he has promised to eliminate the “death tax,” which would personally benefit his estate. If you aren’t familiar with what the estate tax is, it’s basically when a person with a lot of money dies and their money is given away in the will, the recipient pays a percentage of their inheritance (ie income). He also wants to put a moratorium on financial regulations, cutting corporate taxes, and slashing the top rate on personal income taxes. This is a bill of goods sold to the Republican Party over the years as a way to generate jobs and stimulate the economy, which it would do if the 1% were interested in spreading their wealth. What we’ve seen over the last few decades, however, is that the gap between the wealthy and the working class has only widened, that more money is being horded at the top, and that despite all of the evidence, blue collar workers will vote against their best interests as long as they buy the rhetoric that the sagging economy is actually being caused by “those libtard socialists in Washington.”

Here’s why some people will vote for Trump despite the fact that … well, that’s he’s Donald Trump. Wedge issues. If you believe that abortion is immoral, then you have a stake in who is appointed to The Supreme Court. If you think that there’s a threat to your Second Amendment rights, then you have a stake in who is appointed to The Supreme Court. If you hate Hillary Clinton, think she personally murdered a bunch of people and has a tattoo on the back of her neck that says “666,” then you think that God can’t possibly work miracles as long as a Democrat is in the office, so we have to show the world how much we love Jesus by sucking it up and electing anyone that the holy Republican Party chooses from their pool of saintly, God-fearing vessels of Christ!

Wow. That got pretty twisted. Sorry about that.

1) You don’t have to worry about Roe V. Wade, because you already re-elected Bush to fill those Supreme Court slots with anti-abortion advocates, remember? Problem solved!

2) No one is trying to take your guns, and even if they were, you would shoot those commies long before they could, right? Problem solved!

3) Are you nucking futs?!?

Donald Trump is not the droid you’re looking for.

trump-02