I knew it!  I really DO live in the most Republican district in Georgia! Georgia’s 6th Congressional district has a partisan index of +19… and it shows!

Charlie Cook notes that Democrats are in a good news/bad news situation heading into the 2010 midterm elections.

“The good news for them is that the Republican Party still has horrific ratings — 31 percent favorable, 58 percent unfavorable in the CBS/Times poll, compared with 56 percent favorable, 34 percent unfavorable for Democrats. And nothing the GOP is saying or doing is helping its cause.”

“The bad news for Democrats is that midterm elections are rarely a referendum on the party out of power.”

Politico points out the governors “threatening to decline federal stimulus money last month read like a list of Republicans considering running for president in 2012:” Governors Mark Sanford, Bobby Jindal and Sarah Palin.

“But what began with a bang is ending with something closer to a whimper. All three of those governors have been forced to scale back their expectations, to varying degree, as the push of conservative philosophy gave way to the pull of political reality.”

“All three found that praise from the conservative movement in Washington meant nothing to furious state legislators of both parties. And in the end, along with other conservative Republican governors, the three submitted letters in recent days asking to be eligible for federal funds.”

The latest update on the NY-20 special congressional election shows Scott Murphy’s (D) lead is now 46 votes over Jim Tedisco (R).

Republicans are tea bagging. They’re having tea bagging parties. Republicans want to protest rolling tax rates back to Clinton-era rates and are equating their protests to the Boston Tea Party. So Why am I giggling while I write this and why do most people outside the GOP have a hard time keeping a straight face when talking about it? Read on…

Ok, watch the next two videos VERY carefully…

I saw a late night premier of Superman Returns on May 22, 2006.  Clocking in at well over 2 hours, I climbed into bed around 2 AM and was up again at 5:30AM to go to work.  I wrote the following review while suffering from a raging “tired” headache that morning.  It isn’t even particularly well-written but somehow became Yahoo’s #1 user review on the movie.

Addressing  The Negativity

Superman Returns is getting mostly good reviews. There are some bad reviews, however, and I’d like to address some of the criticisms in the context of my review of the movie.

I firmly believe that the most of the negativity directed at this film stems from a nostalgic fondness for Christopher Reeve and the 1978 classic, Superman The Movie. Now, there has never been a bigger fan of Reeve and his first portrayal of the character as I am but, as some may remember, even that movie received a fair share of bad press in 1978. They said Reeve was too skinny. They said the flying scenes looked fake. They said reversing the earth’s rotation to turn back time was silly. They said the movie tanked after the first hour. I didn’t agree with any of it, but critics will be critics and fans can be quite possessive of what they see as “theirs.”

After all, my dad never liked Chris Reeve. He grew up watching George Reeves and thought the 1978 movie was long, dull, and overblown.

Now, almost 30 years later, its easy to forget the film’s low points because what worked worked so well. Such is the same with Superman Returns.

So here is where I differ with the negative press:

Kevin Spacey - Despite reviews to the contrary, I believe Spacey’s Luthor had the most to work with but did the least with it. I’d read that he didn’t try to model his character after Gene Hackman’s portrayal, but IMO, he wasn’t even as good in the role as Michael Rosenbaum from “Smallville.” I’m not saying his portrayal was bad, but I just expected more from Kevin Spacey. When I saw Superman, I didn’t miss Chris Reeve. When I saw Lois, I didn’t miss Margot Kidder. When I saw Spacey, I did miss Hackman.

Kate Bosworth - Again, I’m going to disagree with most critics. I think she gave a solid performance. I mean, what were we expecting from Lois Lane? Did we think she would swoon for Superman the second she saw him? Did we hope she’d become an emotional wreck in Superman’s absence? Lois Lane, since the 60s, has always been a strong, modern, independent woman. Of course she has moved on. Of course she’s going to treat Superman with cool, even cold, indifference. Of course she hasn’t waited for him.

Interesting that some critics are, well, critical of her performance because she isn’t enough like Margot Kidder. Yet they are critical of new Superman Brandon Routh because (they say) he is too much like Christopher Reeve… but he isn’t. Not really.

Brandon Routh - Routh is Superman. Period. But a modern Superman. An emotional one. He feels pain - both physical and emotional. He does what WE do when we’ve lost the love of our life. He broods. He schemes. He flies by her house hoping to catch a glimpse. He does good deeds, not only because he feels compelled to, but because he wants to be accepted. He hasn’t forgotten that his Kryptonian mother told his father that he would be odd and different. An outcast.

And he gets his ass kicked. Oh yes he does. If you’ve ever thought the overgrown boyscout needed a good ass kicking, you’ll be happy. I don’t believe you’ve ever seen a superhero taken down like this before. Watching him being kicked to the ground and dragged across the rocks with is arms flailing was shocking.

I honestly don’t believe Routh borrowed much from Reeve in his portrayal of Superman. Even as Clark, Routh is a little less nerdy. He’s more like the kind of guy no one ever notices, as opposed to the bumbling and clumsy oaf.

The kid - Honestly, he works in this movie. But I don’t want to see a sequel that shows a kid coming of age with super powers. I see that every week in “Smallville.”

The Plot:

Ah, another bone of contention with a few critics. Some have said the movie has a weak plot. But it isn’t any weaker or stronger than the 1978 classic. Luthor still has a passion for real estate, and has hatched a diabolical plot to create a continent. Here, the movie borrows from a relatively new piece of Superman lore - the eradicator - a device created to preserve Kryptonian heritage. Essentially, if the eradicator is deployed, it will destroy everything in its path en route to creating a “new” Krypton.

The kid is a compelling back story.

The effects:

You will believe a man can fly. No, really, you will.

The airplane rescue scene is breathtaking.

The CGI is almost perfect.

Superman’s hair blows in the wind.

All in all, a quite satisfying summer movie.

Iowa legalized gay marriage this week.  So did Vermont.  What makes Vermont’s decision so important is it was done by the State Government.  In other words, no “activist judges” played a role.   Iowa’s move, however, was done by the State Supreme Court who unanimously and correctly overturned a law that denies gay people the right to marry.  Conservatives there (well, in both states) are in deep culture war mode now.  Too bad.  The states did the right thing.

Without even going into the deeper layers of what marriage means to two people who genuinely love each other, our government simply cannot bestow freedoms on some of us and restrict the rest of us if we truly believe we live in a free society.  Honestly, why is it that Republicans resent the intrusion of government in our daily lives but welcome it when it comes to gay marriage?  I realize “giving them people rights” repulses some people.  It repulsed some people when the slaves were freed in the 1860s and again it repulsed some people 100 year later when the government passed civil rights legislation.  The same people were repulsed when women were given the right to vote.  But just as in the cases of civil rights and women’s suffrage, it’s up to those who oppose gay marriage to explain why.   And I can’t imagine there are any logical and relevant explanations to be given.

As the Iowa court wrote in its decision: “We are firmly convinced the exclusion of gay and lesbian people from the institution of civil marriage does not substantially further any important governmental objective. The legislature has excluded a historically disfavored class of persons from a supremely important civil institution without a constitutionally sufficient justification.”