No comments on This person is a heartbeat away from the presidency.
-
-
The number one single today in 1966:
Today in 1971, Rick Nelson was booed at Madison Square Garden in New York when he dared to sing new material at a concert. That prompted him to write …
If I told you the number one British album today in 1983 was “Genesis,” I would have given you the artist and the title:
-
The number one song today in 1957 was the Everly Brothers’ first number one:
The number one British single today in 1960:
The number one album today in 1967 is about an event that supposedly took place on my birthday:
-
The number one British album today in 1973 was the Rolling Stones’ “Goats Head Soup,” despite (or perhaps because of) the BBC’s ban of one of its songs, “Star Star”:
Who shares a birthday with my brother (who celebrated his sixth birthday, on a Friday the 13th, by getting chicken pox from me)? Start with Paul Simon:
Robert Lamm plays keyboards — or more accurately, the keytar — for Chicago:
Sammy Hagar:
Craig McGregor of Foghat:
John Ford Coley, formerly a duet with England Dan Seals:
Rob Marche played guitar for the Jo Boxers, who …
One death of note: Ed Sullivan, whose Sunday night CBS-TV show showed off rock and roll (plus Topo Gigio and Senor Wences) to millions, died today in 1974:
-
This year is the 50th anniversary of the first James Bond movie, “Dr. No.”
It’s also time for another Bond movie, “Skyfall.”
The Wall Street Journal takes an exhaustive look at the Bond half-century, including all 22 Bond movies, the villains …
Bond: “You expect me to talk?” Goldfinger: “No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to DIE.” 
The third Blofeld survived to play the role of the professor/narrator in “The Rocky Horror Picture Show.” Another example of doing the Time Warp again … 
Wouldn’t it have been ironic if Scaramanga had also been a vampire? … the weapons …
… the vehicles (those last two are sometimes the same) …
… and, duh, all the Bond girls:
London’s Telegraph reports the results of a survey of the 22 Bond movie themes.
Their number one (based on measurements of radio, TV, live and online performances) matches my number one:
The author of most of the Bond novels, Ian Fleming, got a presidential boost when President John F. Kennedy told reporters he read the Bond novels. And then Dr. No hit the silver screen, and 007 has been an icon ever since. (Bond far outlived Fleming, who died in 1964, the year the second Bond movie, “From Russia with Love,” came out.)
The secret-agent genre has been popular since approximately 1907, the year Joseph Conrad published his novel The Secret Agent. The John Le Carre novels featuring George Smiley made apparent that the secret agent was vastly exaggerated, but that was never the point.
The formula — good guy, bad guy, girl, exotic setting, gadgets — well, how could you go wrong with that? It’s interesting that neither the actors who played the villains, nor the actresses who played the babes, were usually name actors at the time. (The few instances that wasn’t the case were probably Christopher Lee in “The Man with the Golden Gun” and Christopher Walken in “A View to a Kill,” along with Diana Rigg in “On Her Majesty’s Secret Service, ” and Halle Berry in “Die Another Day.” Of those four, “Golden Gun” probably gets the best ranking, which says something about the importance of story over casting.
Other than being a sports hero or a superhero, Bond might be the most popular male fantasy figure out there. Everyone with the XY chromosome would like to be able to face a deadly situation with
There are some great offscreen ironies in the movies, beginning with the actors who were preferred over the Bonds, or turned down the Bond role. Richard Burton rejected the role three times. Cary Grant wanted to do only one film, and James Mason wanted to do only two. Patrick McGoohan played “Danger Man,” “Secret Agent” and “The Prisoner,” but refused to play Bond because Bond was too promiscuous. Michael Caine could have been Bond for “On Her Majesty’s Secret Service,” but he didn’t want to be typecast after having played anti-Bond Harry Palmer. Mel Gibson and Christopher Lambert weren’t British. Liam Neeson didn’t want to do action movies. (So what was “Taken”?)
Sean Connery won out over Rex Harrison and David Niven (who was Fleming’s personal choice). Timothy Dalton turned the role down twice before taking it for “The Living Daylights.” Ian Ogilvy, who played a TV adaptation of Simon Templar, “The Saint,” as Roger Moore had in the 1960s, was being considered until Moore returned. Pierce Brosnan was to replace Moore in 1986, but he couldn’t get out of “Remington Steele.” Alex O’Loughlin, now playing Steve McGarrett in “Hawaii Five-O,” was considered but lost out to Daniel Craig.
The general consensus is that Connery was the best Bond. He is certainly the Bond to which the others are compared. The additional irony is that Connery left after the first five movies, then came back for “Diamonds Are Forever,” in which he looked old. Connery was replaced by Roger Moore, who was six years … older. Moore had auditioned for Bond by playing “The Saint.”
Even though Moore had aged out of the role by “View to a Kill,” I identify more with Moore as Bond than Connery. Connery’s Bond was on ABC-TV Sunday nights. Moore’s Bond was in theaters. Two of the best soundtracks, “Live and Let Die,” and “The Spy Who Loved Me,” were Moore films.
Dalton appeared to be the Bond producers’ attempt to redo Connery’s Bond. Brosnan appeared to be the Bond producers’ attempt to redo Moore’s Bond. Craig’s Bond might be more like Fleming intended, but I’m not a fan because he lacks the urbane smoothness of the other Bonds.
“Live and Let Die” is my favorite, followed by “The Spy Who Loved Me.” The latter was the first Bond movie I saw in a theater. The former has the best combination of soundtrack …
… Bond Girl (Jane Seymour) …
… vehicle (note I didn’t write “car”) chase …
… and villain’s demise (the villain, played by Yaphet Kotto, blows up, you might say, in the end):
-
We begin with an entry from the It Seemed Like a Good Idea at the Time Dept.: Today in 1956, Chrysler Corp. launched its 1957 car lineup with a new option: a record player. The record player didn’t play albums or 45s, however; it played only seven-inch discs at 16⅔ rpm. Chrysler sold them until 1961.
Today in 1957, Little Richard was on an Australian tour when he publicly renounced rock and roll and embraced religion and announced he was going to record Gospel music from now on. The conversion was the result of his praying during a flight when one of the plane’s engines caught fire.
Little Richard returned to rock and roll five years later.
The number one song today in 1963:
-
Media Matters has discovered a conspiracy in Milwaukee media!
Wisconsin-based radio host Charlie Sykes may want to be the next Glenn Beck.
But a new marketing project aimed at spreading his hard conservative talk brand beyond home station WTMJ of Milwaukee to web, video, social media and perhaps other media outlets owned by parent company Journal Communications is drawing concern in the state’s media community. Sykes’ burgeoning network of platforms resembles nothing other than a smaller-scale version of the former Fox News host’s sprawling web-based empire.
The story quotes from two Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reporters, one of whom, interestingly, has been a Sykes guest:
“That is a fair comparison,” says Don Walker, a 34-year veteran of Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, which is also owned by Journal Communications. “Glenn took this huge, I think risk, getting off Fox, or he was pushed, and he left Fox to form this very, very different venture. I think there is some comparison to that Charlie is making a move in a direction that he senses that he can make a move nationally, that he can make a move in a national direction.” …
“I know that it frustrates some people,” Craig Gilbert, who works out of the Journal Sentinel Washington, D.C., bureau said about his newspaper’s staffers. Gilbert called Sykes “a guy who takes sides in all these political battles” and said the radio host’s show “certainly has an impact on the Republican party, all of the conservative talk, on Republican primaries. It’s a venue where if you are a Republican politician, you can speak to your base in a sympathetic environment.”
Walker agreed.
“I think there’s probably people out there who feel we’re this large cabal and that we’re force-feeding our particular views on all our products,” he said about Sykes’ impact, later adding, “he does this show, I think it is highly, highly partisan, there is no mistaking where he is coming from. I think a lot of people, including journalists, feel that most of the time he is there just to repeat Republican Party talking points.”
I am twice qualified to comment on this. (Not on Beck, since I don’t watch.) I am a former employee of Journal Communications, specifically the Journal Community Publishing Group subsidiary that published the late great Marketplace Magazine until March 2011. Journal Broadcast Group owns the radio and TV stations, including WTMJ radio and TV in Milwaukee. Journal Sentinel prints the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
I was also a guest on WTMJ-TV’s “Sunday Insight with Charlie Sykes” for a couple years, and I have pictures to prove it:
I assume I’m not on the guest rotation anymore since I haven’t been on in more than a year and I’m now farther to the west. (That happens in media circles.) Which is fine. I greatly enjoyed being on his show, and I remain amazed how many people watched me on Sykes’ show.Media Matters’ “discovery” of Sykes is hilarious. He has been on WTMJ since 1992. Before and since that, he’s written books, including A Nation of Victims, Dumbing Down Our Kids, ProfScam,The Hollow Men, The End of Privacy, 50 Rules Kids Won’t Learn in School, and A Nation of Moochers.
But it may be Sykes’ newest effort, the ambitious Conservative Politics Digital Project, which will extend his reach even further. The project, using the website RightWisconsin.com, seeks to take his outspoken conservative approach and expand it to many platforms, including podcasts, web columns, videos, and on-location events.
Given his recent high-profile connections to some of the country’s conservative leaders — and the backing of a communications company that owns 48 television and radio stations in 12 states — observers say Sykes has the platform to push his far-right views nationally.
“He is a smart, ambitious guy and I would not be surprised to see him go beyond WTMJ,” said Jim Romenesko, who runs an influential media news website and worked with Sykes at Milwaukee Magazine in the 1980s. Asked if Sykes could reach that national level, Romenesko added, “I think so, he’s smart, he’s very quick and I think he has what it takes to really capture the audience’s attention. He knows how to play that talk radio game.”
I would argue that Sykes has already reached “that national level,” at least in conservative circles, for obvious reasons that far predate whatever Right Wisconsin will become. In the last two years, with Recallarama getting national attention, for Wisconsin conservative talk radio to get notice is about as surprising as the sun setting in the west. Sykes has drawn listeners and advertisers for 20 years, which (combined with the inability of liberal talk radio to do the same) just drives liberals nuts. (Liberals are of course free to not listen or not patronize Sykes’ advertisers, but that seems insufficient to them somehow.)
I’ve written before about what’s known in state political circles about the Sykes Effect, Sykes’ influence on state legislators within earshot. Sykes’ show is available online, but can’t really be heard on the radio west of Madison or north of the Fox Cities. Sykes may reflect Republican views, but Republicans don’t always reflect Sykes’ views. If Journal Communications were really serious about expanding Sykes’ presence, they’d be looking to syndicate him at least statewide. That hasn’t happened. (And that arguably would detract from his show since listeners outside Milwaukee are not necessarily interested in Milwaukee issues.) If Journal Communications were serious about expanding Sykes’ “cross-platform” presence, he’d be writing a Journal Sentinel column.
To say Sykes is a doctrinaire right-winger isn’t accurate; those who claim he is evidently don’t listen to his show. He touted Tom Barrett for Milwaukee mayor over then-mayor Marvin Pratt. A well-known Madison liberal talk show host has been a caller more than once to his show. Liberals get to be on the show because Sykes wants to debate them; evidently they don’t want to be on his show to have their views challenged live on the air.
The irony of Journal Sentinel reporters’ accusing Sykes of damaging their work is also hilarious. How many times does Sykes appear in the Journal Sentinel? Only in letters to the editor or opinion columns written by others. Sykes’ show is not shedding advertisers or listeners. The Journal Sentinel is another subject, given media reports about their layoffs and given the visual evidence of the size of their daily newspapers. Walker and Gilbert apparently ignore the repeated conservative complaints about the Journal Sentinel’s liberal bias. (And note that Media Mutters — a phrase stolen from James Taranto — Not all of those complaints are justified, but the Journal Sentinel put the column of Eugene Kane, no one’s idea of a conservative, on a news page, and has done that with other non-conservative columns as well. (Kane is no longer employed by the Journal Sentinel, but he’s still writing a column, which is now in the Sunday opinion section, where opinion columns belong.)
Consider as well the Journal Sentinel’s editorial bent, as demonstrated in its recent unsigned editorials:
- Health care in Massachusetts: Anti-Romney.
- Education: Pro-Obama.
- We Energies’ proposed rate increase: Anti-business.
- The proposed Milwaukee streetcar: Anti-suburbs.
- Voter fraud: Anti-clean elections.
- The Manitowoc car ferry: Don’t bother selling subscriptions in Manitowoc.
- The Act 10 Dane County Circuit Court ruling: Anti-taxpayer.
Look back over the past several issues and find a remotely conservative opinion that reflects the view of the Journal Sentinel as an institution of influence. (The JS apparently liked the choice of Paul Ryan for vice president, which is a more parochial opinion than political view.) The Journal Sentinel has for years stated one set of guiding principles and the written editorials contrary to those principles, which is the result of editorials by committee.
To say that Journal Communications is pushing a right-wing agenda is no more accurate than basing a company’s motivations on the public statements of its most visible employees. (Do you think Anderson Cooper or Piers Morgan represent the official corporate views of CNN?) The bottom line of Journal Communications, a publicly traded company, is its bottom line. Sykes makes money for Journal Communications, which is why the Journal Broadcast Group employs him, and why they’re apparently looking to expand the Sykes brand — so Journal makes more money. (Profit is a foreign concept to many liberals and much of the media, which is why I had to point that out.)
Sykes nicely blends sarcasm and self-promotion on his own blog:
But considering the source, the article is actually rather mild even with the usual liberal/media talking points about talking points, etc. I am accused of being a “pot-stirrer” who takes sides. Um, yes. Guilty.
Of course, the comparison to Glenn Beck is both flattering and silly; but I encourage this sort of rampant speculation wherever possible. (BTW: A Nation of Moochers is my seventh, not sixth book. But I quibble.)
I must confess that I took special delight in this comment:“(Sykes) is like a flea that spreads the bubonic plague”My work here won’t be done until I infect the whole nation. (And drive every liberal nuts, which increasingly seems like a doable goal.)The last line sums up everything. Sykes is attacked because he’s effective, and many liberals who tout their views publicly hate to have their worldview questioned. Sykes touted Scott Walker over Mark Neumann as the 2010 GOP gubernatorial nominee. Note who won. Sykes touted Ron Johnson over phony maverick U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold. Note who won.
The answer to speech you find objectionable is always the same — either reply with speech of your own, or don’t read or don’t listen.
-
Britain’s number one song today in 1961:
The number one song today in 1975 (and I remember when it was number one) was credited to Neil Sedaka, with a big assist to Elton John:
The number one album today in 1980 was the Police’s “Zenyattà Mondatta”:
-
The latest sign that Gov. Scott Walker and the Legislature haven’t done enough for the state’s business climate comes in the Tax Foundation’s 2013 State Business Tax Climate Index.
Wisconsin ranks 43rd, the same as one year ago. The 43rd ranking comes from rankings of 32nd in corporate taxes, 46th in individual income taxes, 15th in state sales taxes, 23rd in unemployment insurance, and 33rd in property taxes.
The Tax Foundation notes:
Property taxes and unemployment insurance taxes are levied in every state, but there are several states that do without one or more of the major taxes: the corporate tax, the individual income tax, or the sales tax. Wyoming, Nevada, and South Dakota have no corporate or individual income tax; Alaska has no individual income or state-level sales tax; Florida has no individual income tax; and New Hampshire and Montana have no sales tax.
The lesson is simple: a state that raises sufficient revenue without one of the major taxes will, all things being equal, have an advantage over those states that levy every tax in the state tax collector’s arsenal.
And Wisconsin certainly levies “every tax in the state tax collector’s arsenal.” Which is important because …
The modern market is characterized by mobile capital and labor, with all types of business, small and large, tending to locate where they have the greatest competitive advantage. The evidence shows that states with the best tax systems will be the most competitive in attracting new businesses and most effective at generating economic and employment growth. It is true that taxes are but one factor in business decision-making. Other concerns, such as raw materials or infrastructure or a skilled labor pool, matter, but a simple, sensible tax system can positively impact business operations with regard to these very resources. Furthermore, unlike changes to a state’s health care, transportation, or education system—which can take decades to implement—changes to the tax code can quickly improve a state’s business climate.
Of our high income taxes, the report notes:
The individual income tax systems in these states tend to have high tax rates and very progressive bracket structures. They generally fail to index their brackets, exemptions, and deductions for inflation, do not allow for deductions of foreign or other state taxes, penalize married couples filing jointly, and do not recognize LLCs and S corps.
I don’t know that any of those are the case in Wisconsin other than the high tax rates — 7.9 percent in the case of corporations, and 7.75 percent in the case of individuals. The truism that if you want less of something, tax it more, is demonstrated in the state’s low number of “rich” people and our substandard number of business starts and incorporations. Then again, the fact that state per-capita personal income growth has trailed the national average since the late 1970s demonstrates that aiming to tax upper-income people has deleterious effects down the income chain.
You may notice that the 2011–12 Legislature, despite being controlled by Republicans for most of the session, did not cut taxes. Tax incentive programs get poor reviews:
State lawmakers are always mindful of their states’ business tax climates but they are often tempted to lure business with lucrative tax incentives and subsidies instead of broad-based tax reform. This can be a dangerous proposition, as the example of Dell Computers and North Carolina illustrates. North Carolina agreed to $240 million worth of incentives to lure Dell to the state. Many of the incentives came in the form of tax credits from the state and local governments. Unfortunately, Dell announced in 2009 that it would be closing the plant after only four years of operations. …
Lawmakers create these deals under the banner of job creation and economic development, but the truth is that if a state needs to offer such packages, it is most likely covering for a woeful business tax climate. A far more effective approach is to systematically improve the business tax climate for the long term so as to improve the state’s competitiveness. When assessing which changes to make, lawmakers need to remember two rules:
1. Taxes matter to business. Business taxes affect business decisions, job creation and retention, plant location, competitiveness, the transparency of the tax system, and the long-term health of a state’s economy. Most importantly, taxes diminish profits. If taxes take a larger portion of profits, that cost is passed along to either consumers (through higher prices), employees (through lower wages or fewer jobs), or shareholders (through lower dividends or share value). Thus a state with lower tax costs will be more attractive to business investment, and more likely to experience economic growth.
2. States do not enact tax changes (increases or cuts) in a vacuum. Every tax law will in some way change a state’s competitive position relative to its immediate neighbors, its geographic region, and even globally. Ultimately, it will affect the state’s national standing as a place to live and to do business. Entrepreneurial states can take advantage of the tax increases of their neighbors to lure businesses out of high-tax states.Unlike in the 1970s, when Democratic Gov. Patrick Lucey enacted the Machinery and Equipment property tax deduction, Wisconsin Democrats today look at businesses as cash cows that can be taxed to unlimited levels without consequences. Experience proves otherwise. On the other hand, where are Republicans on tax issues? Why are substantial tax cuts not being proposed in GOP legislative campaigns today? Why were there no tax cuts — which should have been accompanied by actual budget cuts — in the 2011–13 state budget? Why vote for Republicans if their tax policies are in practice indistinguishable from their opposition?
-
The answer comes from Facebook:
Steve Prestegard.com: The Presteblog 