Don't Kill The Middle Messenger

   Remember the BP oil spill?  That little mess that ruined thousands of lives and killed untold numbers of animals, destroyed an ecosystem, and just generally reminded all of us how nasty we human beings are?  Well I just recently heard about one of the first arrests in this case, and it happened right here in the Houston area.  No, it wasn't the CEO.  And it wasn't some saboteur who actually caused the oil spill.  It was an ordinary Joe... a member of the massive middle management team at BP.
   This guy was arrested for deleting hundreds of text messages that he had sent to BP which contained information that suggested the oil spill was far worse than what BP was telling the public during that time frame.  He posted bond and got out, but what I'm still trying to understand is why this guy was arrested in the first place.
   Do you really think it was his idea to delete all of those text messages?  Are we supposed to believe that it wasn't some upper-management jerk telling him to get rid of them?  Should this guy really be held responsible for being honest and then deleting evidence, most likely at the order of his superiors?  Does this not seem ass-backwards to anyone else?
   Look the BP oil spill was terrible.  But it wasn't done on purpose.  Sure, you could say that there was negligence, or that it wouldn't have happened if we weren't all so greedy for oil.  But I seriously doubt this engineer from Katy, Texas, had any foul play in mind when he was doing his job that day.  And I seriously doubt that he wanted to cover up how bad the oil spill really was.  I mean he sent out the messages to begin with.
   The point here is that this is going to serve as yet another perfect example of middle management taking the fall for what should be an upper-management issue.  And the worst part of it is that it doesn't even seem like the justice system is trying this time.  There's a civil suit pending against BP as a whole, and that's nice... but if you're going to blame anyone, shouldn't you start at the top and work your way down?  Find the beginning of the chain of command... the guy who doesn't have to answer to anyone, and then work your way down until you figure out where something went wrong.  Figure out who dropped the ball, and then start making your arrests.  Don't just pick some dude who happened to delete some text messages and make him the poster boy for this entire debacle.  I'll bet you we don't see much in the way of trouble for the upper bigwigs at BP.  It's too valuable a company... and probably way too powerful a force in Washington.  It's amazing what money can do...

Risky Business

   Unless you've been in outer space, at the bottom of the ocean, or in a cave somewhere, you probably heard something about President Obama coming out in support of gay marriage.  Oh what glorious chaos this has caused.  It's a journalist's dream, really... facebook pages are blowing up, entire websites are being created, everyone has something to say about this issue, and it's been a lot of fun to watch.  What I really haven't been able to figure out is why he did it.
   Before I move on, I want to preface this by stating very clearly to you my beliefs.  I am not gay.  I don't really get the whole gay thing.  But I don't need to.  I accept it for what  it is.  If you want to be gay, if you want to wear your clothes backwards, if you want to live under a bridge, if you don't eat meat, it makes absolutely no difference to me.  Just don't affect my life with your beliefs, and I will promise to have the same respect for you.  Gay marriage to me goes in two different directions.  From a civil standpoint, it should absolutely be legal.  In the end, it comes down to rights.  There are rights afforded to married couples that non-married couples cannot share.  Many of these have to do with medical and next-of-kin type situations, which are as important to gay people as they are to straight people.  What right do any of us have to refuse those types of rights to anyone based upon their sexual orientation?  Is that any better than refusing it to them because of their race?  Or gender?  It's not.  Then there's the religious side to this issue, and when it comes to religion I completely flip to the other side.  Churches are private institutions, and they should not -- CAN NOT -- be told what to do by the government in this regard.  If a church or other private institution decides that it does not want to recognize marriages between gays, then it has that right.  As long as their refusal doesn't infringe on the couple in any legal manner, then the church can do whatever it wants, and while gays can complain about it all they want, it's a battle they should not expect to win.  So those are my beliefs.  I'm not asking you to agree or disagree with them, I'm just letting you know what they are.  Now why in the world would Obama pick now to talk about gay marriage?
   Was it a political play?  I don't see how.  I think a big chunk of the gay community probably already supports Obama.  It's not like he needs to pander to them for votes.  If anything, a political move might backfire on him, because I would imagine that there are quite a few people who love everything about the guy except his stance on gay marriage... in some case maybe even enough to cause them to withhold their votes.  Now, there could have been money involved, as in gaining political donations from gay supporters... but again I just can't see how that could be enough of a push to outweigh the risks associated with such a one-sided statement.  What's been the most fun to watch though is how the Right has completely blown this whole issue out of proportion.  The right might have a political play here... I mean Obama has potentially lost some voters with this statement.  If I worked for Romney, I'd be all over this, trying to think of a way to take some of the positive steam out from under Obama and hopefully turn those disenfranchised voters my direction.  I would also come out against all of this Rush Limbaugh and "declaring war on marriage" bullshit.  Keep it reigned in, people.
   Was it a distraction?  I think this is much more likely.  I know a lot of people love Obama.  I know he's a charismatic speaker, and I know he has made some very popular decisions over the years.  But the bottom line is he has failed in many, many ways as the president.  The economy is in the toilet, and while you could argue that he inherited that, he hasn't done much to improve things.  If aspects of his Universal Healthcare proposal are deemed unconstitutional, that would be a huge blow to his plans and really complicate things for all of us.  Gas prices are through the roof, despite his promises to wean this country off of foreign oil.  Basically, he hasn't been a bad president, but he hasn't been a particularly good one either.  Romney, on the other hand, is a bit of an unknown quantity.  Sure people don't like that he's Mormon.  Sure people don't like that he tied his dog to the roof of his car.  And I guess the latest thing is something about cutting a kid's hair in high school.  But despite all of these things, most people will agree that he has proven himself to be one helluva businessman.  And I think more and more people, sometimes even the mainstream media, are getting to the point where "anything different is better" in 2012.  So what better way for Obama's campaign to save itself from all of that than by making a radical, polarizing, press-magnet of a statement such as "I think gay marriage should be legal?"  Now all attention is on that.  And it is an important issue.  But I think we can/should all agree that the economy, social security, the wars we're fighting, etc etc etc should probably take a little precedence over this particular topic.  Still, if it works, it works...
   The bottom line here is that most of us have bigger fish to fry right now.  The media is going to continue milking this puppy for as long as it can (if it gets eyeballs to the TV screen, then you can count on it).  And the sad thing is that it hasn't moved anyone any closer to legalizing gay marriage.  All it's done so far as I can tell is drive an even deeper wedge between the people of this country.  Whether you're for or against it, that gives you no right to say or do hateful things to people who don't feel the same way.  And Obama's remarks, whether they had good intentions or not, whether they were a political move, or a distraction from the important issues, or even if it was just him genuinely clearing his conscience and setting the record straight... they have successfully separated us all from one another one again, and even further than before.

The Avengers

   From Netflix: An all-star lineup of superheroes -- including Iron Man, the Incredible Hulk and Captain America -- team up to save the world from certain doom. Working under the authority of S.H.I.E.L.D., can our heroes keep the planet at peace?
   My Take:  Since I was a little kid, I've always been an Iron Man fan.  Iron Man and Collossus... two very under-appreciated heroes.  So when the "Iron Man" movies came out, you can imagine that I was quite blown away.  Finally someone was recognizing the awesomeness, and they could not have cast the part better.  Then I heard about an Avengers movie coming out, and I was even more stoked.  But I was stoked because it meant more Iron Man, not because of the other characters.  Think about it.  "Iron Man" worked because it was a normal person (albeit a rich person) who put on a high-tech suit of armor that was incredibly badass.  Now think about the rest of the Avengers squad.  A dude who wears red-white-and-blue and has super-strength thanks to a "mysterious serum?"  A demigod who has a ridiculous hammer and comes from another planet?  A guy who got too big a dose of Gamma radiation and turns into an uncontrollable green monster?  And then, even worse, a dude who is hyper-accurate with a bow and arrow and a hot chick who flips around a lot?  NOT.  INTERESTED.
   So you can imagine I was a little skeptical going into the screening of this movie.  I had seen "Thor" and "Captain America," and while neither of those movies were terrible, they weren't nearly as good as "Iron Man."  And don't get me started on the "Hulk" movies.  Garbage, except for the kick.  And here they all were, grouped together into a movie that was directed by a pretty awesome dude.  But awesome as he may be, you can only polish a turd so much.  Or so I thought.
   "The Avengers" is an incredibly awesome movie.  There really is no other way to put it.  It has all the action and visual glory of "Transformers," minus the stupid Linkin Park songs and slow-mo chicks-getting-out-of-cars.  Add in some witty dialogue, excellent character interaction, and truly deep, comic-like storyline (conflicted characters not exactly getting along, yet expected to save the world), and you've got something special.  Somehow, every single character in this movie was relevant.  Each one of them served a purpose, and this was the first movie I've ever seen where I actually enjoyed watching The Hulk (it even has a punch).
   I have two minor complaints.  First, Hawkeye was a bit much.  I mean I get that the guy probably has insecurities.  Iron Man has his armor, Captain America has his super-strength, Thor is a god, The Hulk doesn't have to prove anything to anyone, and Black Widow is smoking hot.  And Hawkeye gets a fancy bow-and-arrow.  So I can forgive him for being a bit of a douche.  But when he shoots blindly while trying to talk like a badass?  Unacceptable.  Second, where in the world was the military response to the alien invasion of Manhattan?  I heard reference to "The National Guard won't be here for an hour."  Nice try.  Could you really not spare enough budget to get some soldiers and military hardware out there?  Hell I bet they'd do it for free.  Just look at the "Transformers" movies.  I have my complaints about them, but I will say this: they always did a good job of making our military look badass.  This could and should have been a bigger priority in "The Avengers," but it just wasn't.
   Still, do not let these minor shortcomings stop you from seeing this incredibly awesome movie.  "The Avengers" is on par with both of the "Iron Man" movies, and I would even put it up there with the Christopher Nolan "Batman" movies.  Yes, it's that good.  See it.  See it in theatres if you can.  It's worth it.

  Until next time...