The Black Human Torch and race deaf casting.

Ok, I'm going to take a break from ranting directly about politics in this one, and instead do something a bit different

For those of you who arnt paying any attention and arnt huge comic book nerds, FOX studios just announced the new cast for the relaunched Fantastic Four movie series, and its getting ALOT of attention.

You see here's the cast photo

 

And heres the comic book version of the Fantastic Four:

Notice anything different? Like say the lack of a black guy?

Yea see thats what all the outrage is about.  People are a little mad a white comic book character has been turned into a black film character.

Now to be fair, this is not the first time a Marvel movie has done this (nor is it the 2nd or 3rd)

Nick Fury Movie/TV Version

Nick Fury Comic Version

 And every time it generates outrage.  And usually the push back against the outrage comes down to accusations of racism or demanding too much "purity to the source material" and that people should just get over it.  And usually the push back is 100% correct. There is nothing saying these folk cant be black, and no reason they should be competently true to stories designed for a different medium.

But this time its a bit different, the accusations of racism still ring true, and anyone who's ONLY objection is that Johnny Storm, the character played by the black actor, is white, should be told to shut the hell up and get over it.

However the "stay true to the source material" people have a bit a point here, and one I think may need to be examined even further as more and more comic books become movies.

See the gimmick for the fantastic four is that they are a family first, and a superhero team second. And the family part is meant literally, 3 of the 4 members are actually related by blood and marriage, and many of their stories and the reasons things play out the way they do, revolve less around the super powers and more around the family aspect.

See in the comic, Johnny Storm is the younger brother of Susan Storm Richards, the wife of Reed Richards. Now in the movie, as previously stated, Johnny Storm is a black man, and Susan Storm is a white woman.

And that is what makes this different than other previous "race swapping" of characters, because this creates a problem that could take away from the movie, because it creates a question that the movie needs to answer, "how are these two people even remotely related?"

Now to be clear, I dont want to take anything away from either actor, they are both fine choices, but the simple fact is, by looking at them, they dont even come close to passing as siblings.

Susan and Johnny Storm.

Which means the movie has to explain HOW these two people are actually brother and sister. Something is shouldnt have to do, and something that will distract from the rest of the story, but something that HAS to be done in order to set up the right dynamic needed for the Fantastic Four, that they arnt just "4 superheroes on a team" as the Avengers are, but that they are a regular normal real family who happen to be superheroes.

Now I'm not saying Johnny Storm has to be white, by all means make the Invisible Woman black, wouldnt bother me in the slightest. What I am saying though, is that some times race NEEDS to be a factor in casting.

Marvel presumably already knows that, no matter how good the actor in question, they will NEVER be able to cast a black man as Steven Rogers/Captain America. It's simply not believable that in the early 1940's the United States government would pick a black man to give superpowers to, and make THE face of the United States in World War II.

For similar origin and characterization reasons Marvel presumably knows they wont be able to cast a white man as the Black Panther when that movie gets made in the upcoming years.   

Its not something we like to admit, but their are characters who's race and/or religion DO matter and are central to who the character is. Now admittedly its a minority of characters, but they DO exist

The reason I think, that Marvel's race switching has worked so well in the past (well enough that even in the comic's, Nick fury, my previous example, is now a black man, as people liked Sam Jackson in the role so much) is because they have only switched characters whos race really doesnt matter, characters who race needs no explanation, characters who could be any race, and still be able interact exactly the same with every other character they meet.

I think the Storm siblings are different. Although the race of either Storm is not part of their character, the fact that they are biologically related, with the same parentage is. Which means for basically the first time ever, Marvel is taking a character (either Johnny or Susan, it doesnt matter) who should be one race, and making them another, and trying to have it make no difference. But the only way they can do that is by explaining away the difference as part of the story/life/interactions of the characters.

I'm not sure they can pull it off, and I think even if they do they will hurt the film slightly (at best) in the process. And I think its a shame, because while race neutral casting is a admirable goal, and one I hope we as a society achieve, I think "race deaf" casting like this, actually works against that goal. 

Ted Cruz just backstabbed the Republican party........AGAIN.

A famous Texan once said

Now another want to be famous Texan is disproving that old Tennessee/Texas saying.

That man is "Republican" senator Ted Cruz, who this week managed to backstab and severely the Republican Party for the 3rd time in 13 months.

See earlier this week the US congress voted to suspend the debt limit for an entire year. Basically what that means is that until March of 2015, we dont have a debt ceiling. We can basically do whatever we need to pay every bill we have, right up until the presidential primary process is getting underway.

Now Republicans have been saying for years now that they refuse to raise the ceiling without some kind of "concession" so that they can pay for the shit they already bought.

By the way, I tried this with my internet provider, I told them I wont pay the monthly bill until they give me some added benefit, so if this posts cuts out half way through thats likely why.

Now normally the republicans have won on paper, they get some minor policy "concession" that they can sell to their base as a win (the fact that normally that "concession" is either non binding or actually a democratic policy goal is a separate issue).

But that didnt happen this time. This time the Republicans got jack shit, they got nothing. At the same time though they did get 100% of what they asked for, because they asked for jack shit.

See House Republicans could all agree they wanted something in exchange for paying their bills, they just couldnt agree on WHAT they wanted. Which meant they couldnt come up with a demand. Which left them with only two choices:

1) Do nothing and allow the country to default and take 100% of the blame for it
2) Get a small number (28) of republicans in safe seats to cross party lines and vote with the Democrats for a clean increase.

Given that choice House Republicans sucked it up and choose choice #2.

The whole time this was happening Senate Republicans were breathing a HUGE sigh of relief. See thanks to being the minority, they kinda lucked out.

There are currently 55 democrats in the Senate, and only 51 are needed to pass anything. So the Clean Debt Ceiling bill could pass the senate, default could be avoided, and ALL republicans could go on record as being against such "fiscal irresponsibility" (as they call paying bills on time). All they had to do to get this win win situation was nothing.

And then Ted Cruz came along and decided "Fuck that" and he filibustered the bill.

Which meant the Senate Republicans now had a HUGE problem. If the bill failed it would go back to the house, who again have no choice due to lack of consensus, they either pass the bill clean or the GOP takes the blame for allowing default.

Which mean it HAD to pass/overcome the filibuster. Which meant it needed 60 votes. Which meant some Republicans HAD to support the bill.

Now keep in mind, this is an election year. And keep in mind, no matter the truth, the Republican base fully believes that raising the debt ceiling is actually irresponsible. And the Tea Party has been pretty good at knocking out incumbent Republicans in primaries.....only to lose in the general election to the Democrats

Which means, in an election where in theory, control of the senate hangs in the balance, no Republican actually wants to be the one to do this. I mean the 5 who switch sides are basically begging to be picked off in a primary.

But since it had to be done, it had to be done. And the republican answer was safety in numbers. If enough Republicans vote with the Dems it may save the more vulnerable ones by making it appear they had legitimate support.

Which is why 12 Republicans eventually crossed the line and voted with the Dems to overcome to filibuster to allow for a clean debt ceiling vote.

The thing is, the first Republican to be forced to lead the way? Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. And the second? Minority Whip John Cornyn, the other Senator from Texas, both of whom are up for reelection in 2014 and facing tea party threats already.

Only after leadership was committed would 10 other republicans join them, only one of whom is actually up for reelection: Susan Collins of Maine, and half of whom arnt up for reelection until 2018.

Now Collins is a well known moderate Republican, and its a good chance her vote actually will help her in her moderate usually pro democrat state.

But Cornyn and McConnell were basically hung out to dry. Although expected to survive the primary quite easily, Cornyn is looking at a 3 way race (vs Democrats and Libertarians) and will be on the ballot at the same time Democratic Superstar Wendy Davis will be running for the state governor. Which means more Democrats then usual may show up to vote. So anything that could discourage republican base voters (like this vote) could be VERY bad in the long run for Cornyn, and possibly even all Republicans on the ballot in Texas.

McConnell on the other hand is already loosing in the polls to his Democratic Challenger. Now his is expected to beat the tea partier in the primary, but its a much tighter race. In otherwords being force into a vote that will annoy his base is absolutely the last thing he need.  

So basically, thanks to Senator Cruz, its possible the ENTIRE republican senate leadership will be wiped out, and 2 Senate seats could fall to the Dem's (and its likely 1 will, and the republicans will lose their leader)

And what does Cruz get out of doing this? Nothing. Well except name recognition.

Nor actually does it stop there. When asked why he would make reelection harder for McConnell and Cornyn for no reason and to no gain Cruz said this.

“In the 13 months I’ve been in the Senate it has become apparent to me the single thing that Republican politicians hate and fear the most, and that is when they’re forced to tell the truth. It makes their heads explode. A lot of the Republicans wanted exactly what Barack Obama wanted, exactly what Nancy Pelosi wanted, exactly what Harry Reid wanted, which is to raise the debt ceiling, but they wanted to be able to tell what they view as their foolish, gullible constituents back home they didn’t do it.”

In other words, according to senator Cruz.
1) Republicans are liars. In fact they "hate the truth"
2) They dont fear lying because their constituents are too stupid to know they are being lied to.

Yea, that's gonna be in every single Democratic ad against every republican candidate for the next 4 years (or 10 if somehow Cruz wins relection in 2016). Heck that's probably going to in every Tea Party primary attack ad in that same time frame as well.

So good luck Republican's hopefully you've got a good answer as to why your the one republican who can be trusted after one of your own admitted your all liars.

And again what did Cruz get out of this? Nothing......except name recognition, and a mention everytime one of the attack ad's this will appear in gets aired.

But the ultimate irony to this whole thing, Cruz said he only came clean about all Republicans being liars because he was tried of the scam. Yet the first two times Cruz backstabbed the GOP he was lying.

First its when he caused the GOP to make the first ever filibuster of a Defense Secretary nominee based on a claim he appears to have pulled out of his ass, that anyone who thought about it for a second would have been a ridiculous premise (a secret fundraising group for terrorists actually using the terrorist organization name in their name). Of course, it wound up being quickly debunked as made up bull shit.

And of course, by doing so Cruz helped cement the idea of the Republican party as the obstructionist party in the minds of Americans , and at the end of the day, was one of the big examples of abuse of the Filibuster used by Harry Reid when he overhauled the filibuster rules.

The second time was equally bullshit. That would be just a few months ago when Ted Cruz shut down the government. It started with a 21 hour speech Cruz pretended was a Filibuster. The idea, a shut down of the government would stop Obamacare from going into effect. The problem? well a shut down only affects discretionary spending, and Obamacare is mandatory spending, and therefore unaffected.  All you had to do to know that was have a high school reading level. But still republicans went for it, and when Rebublicans did it, and tried to pass his plan to end the Shutdown in their favor, Cruz stabbed them in the back and basically said he wasnt going to support his own idea, they better find their own way out of this.

And that shutdown is one of the big reasons Republican approval ratings are in the toilet. But again Cruz got what he wanted, he became a Household name, oh and he tricked two million more people into joining a Super PAC that supports him.

So again, seeing Cruz of all people take a stand on "Republicans needing to tell the truth" is very ironic. But then again, he's already proven he will say anything or backstab ANYONE if it will advance his goal of staying famous.

If you dont believe me, just ask the birthers.  6 months ago, they were his biggest supporters and were trying to get support for Cruz to run for President in 2016. At which point, for no apparent reason, and completely spontaneously, Ted Cruz released his birth certificate, which showed he was born in Canada. He also released a statement saying that despite that he was still eligible to run because his mother was a citizen and all you need to be a natural born citizen is a single citizen parent (and for the record, he's right). Which is a bit of a problem, as for 4 1/2 years the birthers had been saying the exact opposite about Obama, that his mother's citizenship DID NOT make him a citizen because he was born in Kenya.

So 6 months ago, the birther golden boy Cruz was revealed to be the walking proof they were lying about Obama , no one has heard from the Birthers since.

With that backstab on his own supporters, Ted Cruz  basically eliminated them and ended their movement. All to get his name in the papers for a couple of days.

Which raises the important question, and brings us back to president Bush, given how obvious he is when doing it, how many more times do the GOP and/or the right wing have to get backstabbed by Cruz before they take to heart the message from this song The Who and wont get fooled again?

 

This month in stupid

Alright so its been so long since I did one of these, I'm basically lengthening the period of eligibility and reign of the winner, but otherwise, this is exactly the same as the week long version. So lets get the Million Moron March under way for 2104.

Up first, congresswoman Michelle Bachmann who was on a radio show earlier this month discussing why shes opposed to Obamacare when the following exchange occurred:

Host: There was a story we were playing earlier where a man in Virginia had information stolen by fake healthcare providers. What do you see as the intelligence threats via Obamacare?

Michele Bachmann: Quite simply it appears that Belarus, which is a nation friendly with the Soviet Union, may have a subcontracting contract to build a part of Obamacare.

Ok, for my younger readers, a quick history lesson, just so you can follow what the crazy lady is saying.
About 90 years ago the Russian Empire collapsed and wound up being taken over by a bunch of communists, who managed to spread their view's across a sizable portion of Eastern Europe and became know as the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, or the USSR for short, and also known as the Soviet Union. Now I know all of you who currently in school, from kindergarten to college undergrads, probably never heard of the USSR until the opening ceremony of the Olympics last week. There is a reason for that. The USSR disbanded in 1991.

Meaning that unless Congresswoman Bachmann knows something I don't about the existence of a time machine, I dont think we have to worry about any information about anything being given to the USSR.

Oh and another point, not only does she fail "Time" in her statement, it actually appears Mrs. Bachmann doesnt actually know where the USSR was.

You see, prior to 1991 Belarus didnt exist. Before then it had been part of the USSR (and the Russian Empire, Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania before that)

So Belarus wouldnt have been a "friendly nation" to the USSR, Belarus WAS the USSR (or part of it).

So yea, in one statement, Bachmann fails "current events", "chronology", "geography", "history", and "logic".

But believe it or not, were just getting started on the cavalcade of the cretins.

As long as we are talking about the USSR, we might as well stay with one of their successor states, the aforementioned hosts of the Olympics, Russia.

See our next entrant, and our first ever foreign entrant, is the Russian Government.Or more specifically deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Kozak, who is responsible for overseeing the Olympics.    

The accommodations in Sochi have gotten a lot of heat for being, generously, sub-par. Seriously look up pictures of the Water or "Double Toilets" if you dont know about this.

But see according to Mr. Kozak most of the problems arnt actually Russia's fault, its international sabotage.
His proof? As he told the Wall Street Journal:

“We have surveillance video from the hotels that shows people turn on the shower, direct the nozzle at the wall and then leave the room for the whole day."

That's right, the Russian's know this because they are spying on every single Olympian in the shower when they are naked.

Now look obviously no one actually thinks the russians have shower camera's, nor is anyone buying his excuse.

But really, what type of moron must this guy be to think that suggesting he's watching you bathe is gonna make you feel better about the fact you cant drink the water??? Yea, problem solver this guy isnt.

Speaking of horrible excuses, that brings us to contestant #3 in this week's iditarod of
ineptitude, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, or at least his office.

Ok so there's the whole bridgegate thing, which I'm hoping your up to date with (if not read this). In one of the most recent turns in the saga, it was revealed that the man directly responsible for closing the lanes, David Wildstein, had had his position created specifically for him at Governors Christie's request. It also came out that, according to Wildstein, Christie had lied at his previous press conference about when he said he knew about the lane closures and Wildstein could prove it.

Now in response, the Governor did 2 things. First he changed his story to match up with when Wildstein was claiming Christie knew about the closing. Second, his office attacked Wildstein in a hit piece, that was presented as if it came from the Governor himself.

The piece contained the following sections that got alot of attention.
" In David Wildstein's past, people and newspaper accounts have described him as "tumultuous" and someone who "made moves that were not productive."

• As a 16-year-old kid, he sued over a local school board election. • He was publicly accused by his high school social studies teacher of deceptive behavior"


  Now the reaction to the first paragraph was basically "ok if that was true WHY DID YOU HIRE HIM?"

The second part however was the more problematic. See not only did they slime an adult man for what he did in High School (the same high school he attended with Gov Christie, although according to Christie's previous statements he didnt know anything about him), they also kinda lied.

Yea turns out the teacher who accused him actually says the whole issue was a misunderstanding, that's all, at least thats what he said to the local paper at the time (1979).

So, what do you do when your caught lying about an issue that if true would actually make previous statements you made a lie? Not to mention adding the fact your actually attacking a grown man for his high school behavior, meaning you come across looking like a bully?

 Well simple. It turns out, according to what the governor's office, they kinda forgot to show it to the governor before they put his name on it.

In otherwords, once again, Chris Christie had no idea what his own staff were doing. Just like when his Lt. Gov may have shaken down the Mayor of Hoboken. or when Sandy funds may have "accidentally" gone to complete a developmental complex, that had been undamaged by the hurricane, that just so happened to be owned by a member of Christie's staff. Or just like when Christie didnt know about Bridge-gate until he was asked about it in January....err wait I mean when he saw it on the news in December, or was that November? Well he certainly didnt know about it at the time. Or just like that time in 2009 when his state missed out on a shit ton of educational cash from the federal government, due to a form being filled out incorrectly, and his staff didnt inform him on time(by the way, it was proven they did, they had him on tape)  

So yea, with all this stuff Christie already doesnt seem to know about, is suggesting yet another thing he doesnt know about really the best idea? I'm just saying the dude is starting to look less competent than Rand Paul. Might be time to find a new excuse.

Next up, our runner up. Colorado Republican State Senator Bernie Herpin, who thinks the fact that the Aurora Shooter/the Batman Shooter in 2012 had an 100 round magazine actually may have helped save lives.

Yes, you read that correctly. Here's Mr. Herpin's logic, as presented on the floor of the State Senate when asked why he wouldnt support a bill banning ammunition magazines over a set carrying capacity.

“As it turned out, that was maybe a good thing that he had a 100-round magazine, because it jammed. If he had instead had four, five, six 15-round magazines, no telling how much damage he could have done until a good guy with a gun showed up.”   

Look Mr. Herpin I want to tell you something all of my lovers have said to me, "Dude, size doesnt matter. Really the small ones work just as well as the big ones, I promise"

No really. This idiot actually seems to think the number of bullets in a gun has anything to do with the jam rate. Thing is though, if the gun works perfectly, it wouldnt make a difference how many bullets are in the clip, it would fire all of them

But of course a gun runs the risk of jamming, especially the more its used. But it doesnt matter if those 100 come from one clip or from 6 smaller clips. its about cleaning the gun usually.

So really the only difference between 6 clips of 15 and 1 clip of 100 (other than 10 bullets) is that the shooter would have to STOP shooting to reload. That would be a period of time where people can run without getting shot. and thats also usually when the shooter gets taken down. Just saying.

On the upside I have a new gun bill idea. If you dont know how a gun works, your not responsible enough allowed to own one. How's that sound?

But our winner, and we end on a funny (at least to me) note, is our second foreign nominee, and I dont even know his name.

But you know what, rather than explain to you why he made the list, and won, I'm just gonna copy past the article headline that brought this to my attention.

"Suicide Bomber Instructor Blows Up Suicide Bombers-In-Training"

Now those of you who read my blog regularly know that on occasion I bring in a "special guest" for commentary. Normally its Inigo Montoya of the princess bride. But I think requires a different guest to accurately sum up my initial reaction to the story. So with that in mind, I turn the blog over to Mr. Nelson Munz:

  

Thank you Nelson. In this guys defense though, it is often said the best teachers lead by example, so he must have been AMAZING. In fact all of his [surviving] students have said his class was the BOMB.

Anyways, I think I can safely speak for all of us, as I congratulate our winner on his stupidity and skill at winning the stupidest person of the month, and that is stupidity we can ALL get behind and hope to see more of.

Until next time, this concludes the pilgrimage of the pin-headed.