"Butterscotch and Soda" with Little Audrey (19 )

I have a lot to learn about being a grandfather to 4 girls. I post cartoons here each weekend, thinking that they might enjoy them. It turns out that I have been picking some of my favorites; like Popeye, or the Road Runner, and Betty Boop; thinking that my granddaughters would of course like the same cartoons which I enjoyed as a kid. Man, was I ever wrong!

So, I went looking at the Dora the Explorer cartoons, but just couldn’t even understand them, let alone want to post them. You’ll have to look elsewhere to see what I mean. In my mind; which is quite a disordered place, I admit; these aren’t even cartoons at all.

Stuck for an idea I googled the phrase “classic cartoons for girls” and came up with this character, Little Audrey, and I actually remember seeing a few seconds of these on TV when I was a kid. They were the ones that came on when I went to get a snack. Being a boy I wasn’t interested in Little Audrey, but now that I’ve taken a look at one of these cartoons, I’m a bit intrigued.

   

Little Audrey is actually based upon the Little Lulu comic strip character created by Marjorie Henderson Buell. These cartoons came about between 1947 and 1958 when Paramount decided not to renew the Little Lulu series. Little Audrey’s voice is done by Mae Questel, who also did almost all of the other major female cartoon characters for Paramount, including Betty Boop and Olive Oyl.

The plot of this cartoon, which was the first of the Little Audrey releases, is fairly simple. Audrey can’t stop eating candy and her Nanny is at her wits end concerning what to do about it. In desperation she finally searches the entire house, discovering Audrey’s hidden stashes everywhere and destroying them all. When Audrey discovers her candy missing, she goes into shock and enters a dreamland of; you guessed it; Candy!

But even enough of a good thing can become too much and Audrey ends up locked in a dream world where the very things which she craves all seem to turn against her, singing out their warnings to her in a very clever song “Tummy Ache Blues”, written by Winston Sharples and Buddy Kane. When Audrey finally comes to, she is met by the face of her Nanny; who thought she was dying; but now holds out a box of chocolates, telling Audrey that she can have all the candy she wants.

These cartoons were the product of Seymour Kneitel and illustrators Al Eugster, Bill Hudson and Irving Spector. Though the Nanny character is a stereotype; just as the character of Little Audrey is; the Nanny is clearly the wiser of the two. Now, I wonder how this one will stand up next to Dora the Explorer?

"Nobody's Darling But Mine" - Andy Griffith w/ Randy Travis (199 )

One of the hallmarks of the “Matlock” television series was its attention to grass roots country music. This was really just a continuation of what Andy Griffith had been doing on his earlier series “The Andy Griffith Show” in which he appeared several times with the fictional Darling family, who were in real life known as The Dillards.

A remarkable thing about Mr. Griffith was his willingness to lend exposure to other artists and share the limelight. It takes a very secure person to that in the competitive world of acting. Throughout the “Matlock” series, which ran 7 seasons, he managed to have musicians on several times each season, usually picking with him acoustically. Next to the episode called “The Blues Singer”, with Joe Seneca, this one with Randy Travis is my favorite.

Randy had come to town and almost immediately became accused of a murder he did not commit; which is the standard plot of every “Matlock” episode. He has no money to speak of, but manages to secure the services of Andy; I mean Ben; and even stay at his house, which is badly in need of a paint job. As part of their deal, Randy is supposed to paint it.

When Ben arrives home early the next day he catches Randy singing and playing guitar, and is transfixed by his pure and mellow voice. It’s what he calls “old school.” But by the 4^th day he manages to express his disappointment with his “client” about the lack of progress on the paint job. They end up sitting in his kitchen, where Andy; I mean Ben; just happens to have a mandolin waiting. (He had been waiting for a chance to play with his guest.) And this short version of the old standard by Jimmy Davis was the song that they chose to play.

The episode was called “The Big Payoff” and aired in 1992. With Mr. Travis currently recovering from some health issues I thought it would be kind of nice to remember the contribution which both of these men made towards keeping Country Music alive.

For more about both of these artists from North Carolina, visit the North Carolina Music Hall of Fame in Kannapolis, or on line at;

http://northcarolinamusichalloffame.org/

"Lucky You" with Drew Barrymore and Robert Duvall (2007)

Eric Bana plays Huck Cheever, the son of a great poker player named L.C. Cheever in this father and son drama set in Las Vegas amid the world of high stakes poker. Huck has inherited his father’s gift for cards. He can compute the other player’s hands in his head and make sharp bets. He also has a reckless side which keeps him from ever really being the big winner his father was, and still is. Huck wants to show him up and become the big winner himself.

In the weeks leading up to the big Las Vegas Texas Hold ‘Em Poker Series Chuck must find a way to raise the entry fee of $10,000 in order to play. He will do anything to play in this game, if only to show his Dad that he can do it. He embarks on a week- long spree in which he begs, borrows, gambles and even “steals” in order to come up with the money.

When Huck meets up with his Dad, L.C., played by Robert Duvall, he is a bit shaken, the man is a legend. But with a new love in his life, Billie, played by Drew Barrymore, he is more determined than ever to be a winner. He gets his chance to show his famous Dad up by winning the series in which the old man plays against him, but will he be able to do it? L.C. claims that Huck lets his emotions get in the way, preventing him from winning. Is he right?

This is a much nuanced film with an ending that will make you smile to yourself when you realize that winning takes many different forms.

Post World War Two In Photos

German Wehrmacht General Anton Dostler just prior to his execution by a firing squad in Aversa, Italy, on December 1, 1945. The General was sentenced to death by the United States Military Commission in Rome after having ordered the shooting of 15 unarmed American prisoners of war on March 26, 1944.

Two Allied prisoners pack their meager belongings, after being freed near Yokohama, Japan, on September 11, 1945, by men of the U.S. Navy.

This is the interior of the courtroom at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials in 1946. This photo was taken during the Trial of the Major War Criminals. Hermann Goering, leader of the Luftwaffe, is seated at center right, wearing a gray jacket, and dark glasses. Next to him sits Rudolf Hess, Deputy Fuhrer of Germany. Goering committed suicide the night before his execution. Hess was sentenced to life imprisonment, which he served at Spandau Prison, Berlin, where he died in 1987.

This photo was taken in Hyde Park, London in September of 1945. Among the aircraft were some of the new jet and rocket propelled planes. This is a side view of the Heinkel He-162 "Volksjaeger", which was powered by a turbo-jet mounted above the fuselage.

This is the view on deck of the ship General W.P. Richardson, in New York, teeming with veterans of the European war returning home on June 7, 1945. 

This is a portion of Levittown, New York in 1948 shortly after the mass-produced suburb was completed on Long Island in New York. These type of tract homes would become the symbol of the American Dream in Post War America.

And this is what Europe looked like after the war. It was a far cry from Levittown. This photo shows General Charles de Gaulle shaking hands with children in July of 1945. The town of Lorient was the location of a German U-boat base during World War II. Between January 14 and February 17, 1943, almost 90% of the city was reduced to rubble by Allied bombing.

For the full collection of photos and more information about each of the photos, please go to;

http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2011/10/world-war-ii-after-the-war/100180/ 

"Long Tall Sally" - Little Richard - Live (1956)

This is an outstanding live version of Little Richard performing “Long Tall Sally” on an American TV show from 1956. It’s pure raw rock and roll as only Little Richard could deliver it. Within about 7 more years the Beatles would intersect with Mr. Penniman and he would teach Paul McCartney how to sing this song at the Royal Variety Show for Queen Elizabeth.

Just prior to the show the Fab Four met with Little Richard who showed McCartney how to “ball up some saliva at the back of your throat” and just let it rip! McCartney took the advice and “Ripped It Up” that night and even a few weeks later on Swedish television when he gave the best performance of this song by the Beatles. Just watch Ringo beat the hell out of those drums, and then catch the expression on the face of the emcee as he tries to cope with something he has never experienced before. Beatlemania was about to go worldwide.

"The League" by Bill Mills (2013)

Given enough time; and the opportunity; history will always repeat itself. It may not happen in your lifetime, but through the ages it always has, and we humans seem to learn nothing from it. That may be the most important message in this book, if the author intended there to be one. As Harry Truman used to say, “The only thing new is the history you don’t know.”

As the United States went to war in 1917, a civilian “army” of volunteers; numbering about a quarter of a million people, at a time when our population was just about 100 million in total; went to work spying on one another under the guise of “protecting the home front”. The unintended consequences of this well intentioned action played out across the nation as the American Protective League infiltrated Unions, busted up strikes, and generally intimidated anyone with an opinion against the war in Europe. This should be starting to sound familiar right about now, as we struggle with our own sense of what is right and wrong with the “War on Terror”, and the recently disclosed actions of the NSA.

Between 1917 and 1918 this group was like a miniature NSA, listening to everything said by their co-workers and friends. They even had their own newspaper/magazine called “The Spy Glass”, which gave tips on turning in your neighbors. Even preachers were not immune to this feeling of power, and in at least one case, a clergyman sent in a report about a fellow clergyman with whom he did not agree. 

That the APL became somewhat of a place for people to go in order to “get even”, or a place to settle personal scores should not be surprising at all. It’s human nature. Erich Maria Remarque wrote, in "All Quiet on the Western Front", that “even a dog trained to eat potatoes will snap at meat given the opportunity. Men behave the same way when given the opportunity to have a little authority. Every man is a beast underneath all his manners and customs.”

This book is both timely and informative. It is timely in respect to our current situation in the War on Terror, in which our own government is spying upon us; and informative in the sense that very few Americans alive today really have any idea that what we are experiencing now in relation to “national security”, has all been done before. The lesson of this book is simple; it was a bad idea then, and remains so today.

Secrets and Lies - Self Examination

In the wake of the recent scandals involving the NSA, and the governments hounding of both Mr. Assange and PFC Snowden, I have had to examine my own views on personal privacy, as well as that of the governments right to gather intelligence, before I can even decide if the reasoning behind the opinion I hold is even consistent. This is more of a conundrum than one would think.

In the former case, the government is spying on people and groups; gathering data; which they then keep secret, supposedly for use in the war on terror, or to protect our citizens. And, for the most part, people don’t have a problem with that. But, in the latter case, some of these same people are vehemently opposed to the government intruding upon their own privacy in the name of that same goal. Is this even consistent? Is there a difference in the 2 programs, and how do we tell what that difference is?

I like both Snowden and Assange, mainly because they let me know what the government is doing without my knowledge, or consent; just my money. But, at the same time, I want my government to gather intelligence from people who are legitimately trying to hurt us. The real problem is not in the moral question, as much as it is in the question of who is doing the snooping, and where does the line get drawn as to what will be done with all of the intelligence gathered. (Although you could argue, and I’d agree, that about 99% of calls intercepted would be very boring. Just listen sometime to the conversations people have at the grocery store, etc.)

I have no real answers to this question. It all boils down to whether or not you trust the government to do the right thing with the information they gather. So far, no one is knocking on our doors late at night to “question” us about any particular phone call, and I haven’t noticed any black helicopters hovering about, but it still makes a person feel a bit uneasy to know that you’re being monitored in some sort of way.

It hasn’t stopped anyone from writing down their opposition to the programs, but you have to wonder if someday what you write will be thrust in your face as part of a “re-education” program. Just as the potential for good is present in the NSA programs which monitor suspected terrorists, the same potential for misuse does exist and, as such, bears watching. So far, my money is on our government to use the intelligence they gather to protect us from harm. Only time will tell if these programs are being used for other, less noble, purposes.