Another Dictator Bites The Dust?

Image via WikipediaMuammar Gaddafi has been running Libya since 1969, sometimes into the ground.  Over 42 years, he has antagonized the rest of the world with his actions, while keeping a tight lid on the movements of his fellow citizens.

Now Gaddafi is in the battle of his life, fighting to retain his power as opposition forces move in on the capital of Tripoli.  He has vowed to stand and fight as onetime allies of his desert him.

Libya has become the latest Middle East country whose people finally had had enough of a decades-old dictator, yet do not have a clue as to what comes next.

Granted, Gaddafi has always been the epitome of the tinhorn dictator.  Lately, though, he's been making rambling speeches from inside bombed out buildings (courtesy of U.S. airstrikes during the Reagan era), assuring everyone that everything was under control when it really wasn't.

Now that most Americans who wanted to leave Libya have been evacuated (with the exception of a few hardy journalists), the United States is putting out the word that they're ready to help get rid of Gaddafi if the people there so desire.  Besides freezing financial assets, no such request has been made so far.

In a classic case of "be careful what you wish for", those who are cheering the overthrow of oil-rich Middle Eastern governments will soon be paying for it.  Price hikes in gasoline and food due to the unrest are threatening an already-fragile economy.

Whatever happens in Libya will be interesting to watch.  Because Gaddafi has dominated the political landscape in that country for so long, crushing any kind of formal opposition, the people there will have to start from scratch.  Just like the people in Tunisia, Egypt and who knows where else.  Throwing off the chains of dictatorship is one thing.  Forming a new nation out of the ashes is quite another.

Oscar Hails "The King's Speech"

Image via WikipediaTo no one's surprise, a film about a stuttering king who was trained to speak flawlessly on the wireless at a time when his country needed him the most was the big winner at the 83rd Academy Awards.  "The King's Speech" won four Oscars out of 12 nominations for director Tom Hooper, actor Colin Firth's portrayal of George VI, original screenplay and for best picture.

Natalie Portman got her Best Actress trophy for "Black Swan", while "The Fighter" won supporting actor awards for Melissa Leo and Christian Bale.  If Leo almost sank her chances because of the way she handled her voting campaign, she became known for dropping the proverbial f-bomb during her acceptance speech (which ABC mercifully bleeped), then apologized for backstage.

Considering all the stories we've been hearing about the mysterious artist Banksy, whose work can be seen in various Los Angeles locales and has attracted considerable attention with law enforcement and copyright attorneys.  His film was nominated for Best Documentary, and everyone was wondering if he'd reveal himself to accept the award.  The Academy avoided embarrassment by awarding the prize to the film "Inside Job", which chronicled Wall Street's role in the financial meltdown of 2008.

The Oscar telecast was co-hosted by James Franco and Anne Hathaway, who did their darndest to become a 21st century version of Donny and Marie Osmond without quite succeeding.  One wonders how the Academy came up with this pairing until you consider how it all benefits Disney and ABC, the TV network it owns.   Franco used to be on the ABC soap "General Hospital", while Hathaway was introduced to movie audiences in Disney's "The Princess Diaries".  They were no match for Billy Crystal, who was on hand to introduce a hologram of Bob Hope introducing a special effects category.  Both were missed.

There were some things that the Oscar telecast improved on this time.  There were no boring montages of Great Movies of the Past.  The "In Memoriam" segment, sung by Celine Dion, was tastefully done with no camera pans of the giant screen onstage and no applause until the end, when Halle Berry saluted Lena Horne (which only served to remind folks that no black performers were nominated this year).  The embarrassing testimonials for the Best Actor and Actress nominees were limited to Sandra Bullock and Jeff Bridges, respectively, from the stage.  And the show ran just over three hours, not "127 Hours" as some had feared.

It was officially announced during the show that ABC will continue to televise the Academy Awards through 2020.  By then, the network will have been Oscar's TV home for over 40 years.  Who knows what TV--or the movies--will look like by then?

Standoff In Badgerland

Image by Getty Images via @daylifeGovernor Scott Walker of Wisconsin, who's only been in office a few weeks, had to know what kind of havoc he just created.  He and his fellow Republicans are behind a bill that's going through the state legislature that would restrict collective bargaining for state employees, which in turn would help solve their budget crisis.  Without it, the governor says, layoffs would become necessary.  And he's not interested in compromise, which could be a big mistake politically.

Tell that to the protestors who jammed the state capitol in Madison, the 14 Democratic state senators who fled across the border to avoid voting on the bill, and to the parents whose kids stayed home from school because their teachers called in sick--but not sick enough to keep them from joining in the protests.

Unions have become less and less important as corporations have figured out that they could include many of the same provisions, such as a shorter workday and an hourly wage, that they had been resisting for a century without hurting their bottom line.  Now government is catching on.

Wisconsin and Minnesota are among several states that are now millions of dollars in debt.  The GOP and the Tea Partiers tell us that wasteful government spending is the problem, but it is also the national economic climate with fewer people working and more companies either shutting down or moving elsewhere.  That means those states aren't collecting as many tax revenues as they used to.  And still they have to provide certain services, such as health care and unemployment benefits,  for those who can't afford them any other way.

What's happening in Madison could soon be playing out on a national stage.  Republicans in Congress are threatening to shut down the federal government, which is trillions of dollars in debt, unless they get the budget done their way and not President Obama's.  They tried this tactic back in the mid-1990s when they took control of both houses of Congress, with the results being so disastrous for the GOP that President Bill Clinton was re-elected.

We're told by those who think they know that government has to live within its means, just like the rest of us do.  That's a nice thought, but is it possible?  What does "living within your means" actually mean, anyway?  You can cut and cut and cut your way to a balanced budget, only to find that the people you serve are going to suffer needlessly.  Is that what the Republicans really want?

This latest example of political gridlock would be mere farce if the stakes weren't so high.  The protestors who are fighting this possible law are also fighting for their lives.  Trouble is, so is the state of Wisconsin.

I'll Take 'Man and Machine' for $200, Alex

Image by LeeLeFever via FlickrAn IBM computer named Watson defeated two human competitors--past champions Ken Jennings and Brad Rutter--to take the million-dollar prize on a special edition of TV's "Jeopardy".  Since computers can't spend money (unless it's the virtual kind), IBM says it is giving the prize winnings to an alleged charity.

This is the most buzz "Jeopardy" has had since Jennings set a record for consecutive wins a few years ago.  At times, the two-game, three-day competition played like an infomercial for IBM.  They spent so much time explaining Watson to the audience that they almost forgot to play the game.

Watson isn't infallible.  Though it racked up more points than either Jennings or Rutter could muster, not to mention being programmed to be quicker on the signaling devices, Big Blue's creation still got some things wrong just to prove it could be--human.  Take the Final Jeopardy category U.S. Cities.  The answer:  This city has two airports.  One was named for a World War II hero, and the other for a famous battle.  The correct question:  What is Chicago (for O'Hare and Midway airports)?  Watson's response was:  What is Toronto?

"Jeopardy", which has been hosted by Alex Trebek since the syndicated version went on the air in 1984, is still the best game show on TV.  They deserve credit for keeping difficult categories like Shakespeare, the Bible and classical music in the mix.  But we can certainly do without the word game categories that make the show and the contestants look ridiculous, as well as the celebrity and kids tournaments.

Some fear that, with Watson's victory, this is the beginning of the end for the human race.  Not so fast.  Maybe someday computers will be doing all our thinking for us.  But who's going to put in the information?  As far as we know, computers aren't capable of doing that.  Maybe IBM is working on it right now . . .

Arianna and Keith: Changing Partners

Image by Getty Images via @daylifeTwo progressive icons, Arianna Huffington and Keith Olbermann, have moved on with their professional lives.

First, Huffington.  She has gone from being a conservative pundit who was married to a Republican congressman, to becoming an Internet mogul with a popular website while continuing to appear all over TV as a commentator.

The website she co-founded, The Huffington Post, was bought by AOL for $315 million.  Huffington will now be chairing a new media group that oversees HuffPo and other AOL properties.

AOL, which used to be known as the dial-up service America Online (you did throw out those start-up discs, didn't you?), hasn't been relevant in years since their disastrous merger with Time Warner.  In fact, it came as a surprise to most people that AOL was still in business.

So what is AOL getting for its money besides having Arianna on its payroll?   They get a left-leaning news site that aggregates content from all over, with little that's original besides unpaid celebrity bloggers and the latest dish on the Kardashian sisters.

Fans of the liberal persuasion are concerned that Arianna has sold out literally and figuratively, and they fear that HuffPo might become more mainstream in its viewpoint.  Like we said, Arianna wasn't always a liberal.  Time will tell if this new venture can bridge the gap between right and left.

As for Olbermann, who recently quit MSNBC in a huff, he's going to work for former Vice President Al Gore's Current TV channel with a new show to debut in the spring.  Besides owning stock in the channel, Olbermann will also have the title of Chief News Officer.

Current TV, which runs mainly documentaries, can be found on satellite and some cable systems.  It bears no relation to The Current, a Twin Cities-based alternative music radio station that is owned by Minnesota Public Radio.

We have no idea what Olbermann's new show is about, but we wonder if NBC claimed 'intellectual property' rights on the words 'countdown' and 'worst persons in the world' to prevent him from using those bits at his new network.  That is, the same kind of deal David Letterman and Conan O'Brien had when they left NBC in not exactly the best of terms.  But Olbermann's feud with Bill O'Reilly and Glenn Beck should continue.

When Olbermann suddenly left MSNBC, they reshuffled their prime-time lineup this way:  Lawrence O'Donnell in the old "Countdown" time slot, followed by Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz.  Right now they're having trouble competing with CNN (enjoying a resurgence because of their Egypt coverage), let alone Fox News Channel.

Both Arianna Huffington and Keith Olbermann deserve props for turning progressivism into a marketable commodity.   It's just that the smaller their platforms get, the less visible their causes become.  Just ask anyone who used to work for Air America Radio.

Lady's Night at the Grammys--Antebellum, That Is

Image via WikipediaLady Antebellum, a country band whose hit single "Need You Now" got on the pop charts for some reason, was the big winner at the 53rd Grammy Awards in Los Angeles.  They won five awards, including Song of the Year and Record of the Year.

When you think about what the other nominees were in those categories, such as Eminem's "Love The Way You Lie" and Cee-Lo Green's--uh--"The Song Otherwise Known As 'Forget You'", this was the relatively safe choice for the recording academy.  That's right.  A song about getting drunk and calling at one in the morning.  That's the stuff of pop radio.

Other shockers from what has got to be one of the weirdest nights in Grammy history:  Best New Artist went to someone named Esperanza Spalding, a jazz artist.  Is Justin Bieber that overexposed?

Barbra Striesand and her "A Star Is Born" co-star Kris Kristofferson were on hand to announce the Album of the Year, and the Grammy went to . . . "The Suburbs" by Arcade Fire, an alternative band from Montreal, who kept their acceptance speech short so they could play their second tune of the night.  Is Lady Gaga that overexposed?

Other highlights (and lowlights) from "Music's Biggest Night":

• A tribute to Aretha Franklin, led by Christina Aguilera and Martina McBride, kicked off the CBS telecast.  Apparently the folks at the recording academy thought they'd better do this before the Queen of Soul, who is not well and sent along taped best wishes, is no longer above ground.  Maybe it's best to keep in mind what Mark Twain once said about reports of his demise.
• Lady Gaga, who scored three Grammys and a "60 Minutes" interview, performed her new single "Born This Way" wearing plastic see-through costumes.  In one of her acceptance speeches, Gaga dedicated the song to Whitney Houston because she said she imagined her performing it.
• Justin Bieber performs with Jaden Smith as the cameras cut to Smith's proud parents.  Surely you've never heard of Will and Jada Pinkett Smith?
• The Old Guard was heard from.  Bob Dylan performed "Maggie's Farm", Barbra Striesand sang the love theme from "A Star Is Born" (aka "Evergreen"), and Mick Jagger performed what sounded like a tribute to Solomon Burke just after the obligatory "In Memoriam" montage.
• Cee-Lo Green performed--uh, what was the name of it again?-- with a band of puppets and Gwyneth Paltrow, wearing what looked like the NBC peacock (bet CBS was amused).  It was "Sesame Street" gone berserk.  

As for these Grammys, well, forget this.  If you can.

"Egypt Is Free!" Now What?

Image by Frame Maker via FlickrTwenty-four hours after Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak enraged his country by refusing to step down, he had flown the coop, leaving his hand-picked vice president to announce on TV that power had been ceded to the military, who apparently no longer believed in him.

It took 18 days and 300 casualties, but the streets of Cairo and across Egypt are celebrating the fact that they have peacefully toppled a dictator who ruled for 30 years.  In reality, though, it was a military coup.

This was a revolution fueled by the advent of social media networks, bringing together those who had gotten tired of the way Mubarak and his minions had been running the show for three decades.  And it was all televised to a worldwide audience, in spite of the regime's best efforts to suppress it.

Until recently, Mubarak had good relations with the United States in terms of keeping the peace in the Middle East and with holding the line on terrorism.  The peace treaty Mubarak's predecessor, Anwar Sadat, signed with Israel is still in effect.

So what happens now?  Many questions remain.  Will there be real democracy in Egypt?  Mubarak pretty much outlawed opposition parties when he took office after Sadat's assassination under martial law, and has never rescinded it.  Will the military keep its promise to hold new elections, or did the revolution just trade in one autocrat for another?

As for the rest of the Middle East, where autocratic rulers abound, they're watching their backs and taking notes on how to deal with the next revolution.  So is Israel, but for different reasons.  The next wave would not so much be a victory for democracy as it would be for radical Islamists.  The United States, still dependent on Mideast oil and still Israel's biggest defender, would be a big loser in all of this.

For now, Egyptians have every reason to celebrate what they have accomplished.  Tomorrow, the real work begins to rebuild a country.