RIP Robert Morse

The New Neo Posted on by

When I read that Robert Morse had died at the age of 90, my first thought was “Drat!” My second thought was, “How could he be 90? Impossible!” Because to me Robert Morse always looked like a kid.

Morse rose to fame as the lead in the Broadway musical “How To Succeed in Business Without Really Trying.” He also starred in the film version, although I never saw him in either except in video clips. This one, which is a song he sings to himself in a mirror, perfectly captures his impish (the adjective that’s so often used to describe him) verve and humor, and that gappy grin with the dimples. The guy can really sing, too:

(For a more recent revival and comparison featuring Matthew Broderick, who in my opinion can’t hold a candle to Morse, see this beginning at 00:40).

However, I have very strong memories of seeing Morse on stage before that, in a musical practically no one knows anymore called “Take Me Along.” It was a musical version of Eugene O’Neill’s “Ah Wilderness,” and I had to look it up to see the year: 1959. Wow. It starred Jackie Gleason, who had been a big TV personality as Ralph Kramden (a show I used to watch), as well as Walter Pidgeon. But to me, and to most of the audience, the real star was Morse, who lent it tremendous energy and comic earnestness as the family’s teenage boy, although he was close to thirty at the time. Every number he did stopped the show. Morse’s talent beamed out into the audience with wattage that couldn’t be denied.

Alas, there are no clips of him in that production. But here he reminisces about the experience:

A completely and utterly unique actor.

Roundup

The New Neo Posted on by

I keep feeling the need for roundups because there are so many news stories of interest these days. It seems pretty intense out there.

(1) Tucked away at the end of this story is a hint at something I’ve suspected, as have some other commenters on this blog:

Chechen troops have widely been seen as playing the role of “enforcers” during the war, and many survivors of the Bucha massacre outside Kyiv said the mass execution of civilians only began after Chechen troops were sent in to replace Russian soldiers there.

I have no idea whether that’s true, though – and at this point neither does anyone else except the people involved.

(2) Another deceptively edited interview with Trump.

(3) “Bookworm” Andrea Widburg advises not to throw away your masks yet, and I agree:

…[T]he Biden administration has a problem: because it’s clearly lost the center, it must double down on pleasing the base — and the base wants masks. Rather than come out and admit that, the Biden administration shifted to the CDC the responsibility for deciding whether to appeal the order, and it turns out that the CDC doesn’t want to lose its power…

The CDC quite predictably wants the DOJ to appeal the ruling against the masks on transportation.

(4) Victor Davis Hanson catalogues the ways in which Biden has deliberately hurt America.

(5) Liz Cheney’s re-election donations are barely coming from Wyoming. Instead:

According to a Federalist analysis of Cheney’s campaign finances to date based on public records from the Federal Election Commission (FEC), less than 10 percent of the dollars Cheney raised came from Wyoming residents. Only about 2 percent of Cheney’s total contributors were from her home state.

In contrast, donors in Northern Virginia with fundraisers featuring Utah Sen. Mitt Romney sent more than $880,000 to the campaign, a full six figures higher than the $780,000 raised among Wyomingites. Cheney raised more than $760,000 from California and more than $720,000 from Texas.

But I’m not at all sure that any amount of money would make Wyoming voters like Cheney or vote for her.

Here’s a new poll on Biden’s approval numbers

The New Neo Posted on by

Of course, you may think polls are garbage. But I find this recent one of interest. It indicates that young voters are deserting Biden:

The new poll found that Biden’s approval rating among millennials and Generation Z respondents had dropped nearly 20 points since the beginning of his presidency.

Thirty-nine percent of Generation Z respondents said they approve of the job Biden has done as president, a 21-point decline from 60 percent of respondents who approved of Biden’s handling of the job when he first took office.

Forty-one percent of millennial respondents said they approve of Biden’s job as president, a 19-point decline from 60 percent of respondents who approved of his job as president through the months of January and June 2021, his first months in the White House.

That sounds encouraging. However, here’s a caveat:

Along party lines, 30 percent of Generation Z respondents who identify as Democrats said they approve of Biden’s job as president, while 52 percent of independents and 18 percent of Republicans surveyed agreed, according to the poll.

Twenty-seven percent of millennial respondents who identify as Democrats approve of the job Biden has done as president, while 53 percent of independents and 20 percent of Republicans surveyed also approve of Biden’s job as president.

The large disparity between Democrats’ and Independents’ approval rating is counter-intuitive, and to me it represents the likelihood that the young Democrats disapprove of Biden only because he is ineffective at achieving some of the leftist aims for which they were hoping.

If you look at the chart here, you’ll find another interesting thing: the drop in approval for Biden varies inversely with the initial level of approval. In other words, initially the youngest groups had the highest approval ratings for Biden, and they not only have had the steepest drops, but their approval ratings have now dropped to lower levels than the present levels among the older groups.

The older groups had lower ratings for Biden to begin with, but among Boomers the levels have only gone down seven points (to a current level of 46, significantly higher than among the young). Among the generation before the Boomers (a group the poll calls “Traditionalists”, a designation I’ve never heard before) the ratings haven’t moved at all – they were 48% approval and they remain at 48%, the highest level of all the groups even though that group had the lowest level to begin with. Apparently it’s at least partly because there are fewer Independents in that group. But that doesn’t entirely explain the phenomenon.

In addition, Biden’s approval rating has fallen approximately 20% among blacks and Hispanics – although the levels remain higher than other groups with black approval at 67% and Hispanic at 52%.

It always puzzles me when people who call themselves Conservatives approve of policies or people that no conservative could like, and this poll is no exception with 15% of supposed conservatives approving of Biden’s performance. Either they are lying, joking, misunderstanding the meaning of the term “conservative,” not paying attention, or happy with Biden because he is hurting the fortunes of the left.

Putin’s nuclear-missile-rattling

The New Neo Posted on by

Poor innocent Russia, threatened on all sides by enemies while minding its own peaceful business, wants everyone in the world to know it’s prepared and ready:

Russia announced on Wednesday it had successfully launched a new missile that it said could deploy nuclear warheads at hypersonic speeds anywhere in the world and outwit defenses, a move that President Vladimir V. Putin said was aimed at showing Russia’s adversaries that they needed to “think twice” before threatening his country.

Russia’s been a nuclear power for over seventy years, and for many of those years it’s had a plethora of nuclear weaponry. Maybe I’m forgetting – the Cold War had such a high degree of threat and I was young enough that perhaps I wasn’t paying much attention – but I don’t remember this high a level of global nuclear threat talk from Russia before.

However:

But even if the test was successful, the new missile does not appear ready for use. The Russian Defense Ministry said Wednesday’s test launch of the Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missile was its first and that it would enter Russia’s arsenal only “after the completion of the testing program.” There was no immediate comment from American officials about the launch.

Mr. Putin first announced Russia had developed the Sarmat in 2018, but his decision to test it on Wednesday appeared intended to send a blunt message in the middle of the war in Ukraine…

Mr. Putin said in his brief remarks that the Sarmat consisted only of Russian-made components, an apparent attempt to show that Russia’s defense industry was undaunted by Western economic sanctions.

I don’t know how much respect we can have for “Russian-made components” at this point. But no one wants to have to find out.

ADDENDUM:

This event seems to be at least slightly relevant, or perhaps symbolic:

Thursday, a fire ripped through the Russian Ministry of Defense’s 2nd Central Scientific-Research Institute in Tver, some 80 miles northeast of Moscow.

This “research institute” is responsible for designing surface-to-air missiles and ballistic missiles for Russia’s aerospace military programs…

The official story is that old construction and flammable insulation caught fire.

As the author of the piece points out, “Housing a critical design facility in a firetrap speaks volumes for the state of Russia’s military.”

Even some Democrats are sounding the alarm about Biden’s plan to scrap Title 42

The New Neo Posted on by

The vocal Democrat opposition to Biden’s tremendously destructive plan includes quite a few members of the House and even some senators. My guess is that almost none of these people would give a hoot about it if it weren’t for the timing; it’s scheduled to take place at the end of May, which is way too close to the upcoming midterm elections.

Ohio Democratic Rep. Tim Ryan, who announced last year his bid to succeed retiring Republican Sen. Rob Portman, told Fox News Digital that the removal of Title 42 is “wrong and reckless” as he warned of repercussions and the safety of Americans.

“The administration’s decision to roll back Title 42 is wrong and reckless,” Ryan said. “Prematurely ending this policy without a path forward does nothing to keep Americans safe, support our Border Patrol agents, protect asylum-seekers, or bring about the comprehensive fix our immigration system needs.”

Similar remarks came from Rep. Susie Lee, D-Nev., Rep. Sharice Davids, D-Kan., Rep. Elaine Luria, D-Va., California Democrat Rep. Mike Levin, Rep. Stephanie Murphy, D-Fla. (not seeking re-election), Maine Democrat Rep. Jared Golden, Reps. Angie Craig, D-Minn., Rep. Val Demings, D-Fla., and Kim Schrier, D-Wash. Senators of the same opinion inclue Sen. Michael Bennett, D-Colo., Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va. (of course), Arizona Democrat Sens. Kyrsten Sinema (unsurprising) and Mark Kelly, Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nev. (who was all for ending Title 42 when it was Trump’s policy), and Warnocke of Georgia (facing a tough fight against Herschel Walker). Then there’s Sen. Maggie Hassan, D-N.H., who has long positioned herself as a moderate but has gone along with just about everything (or maybe in fact everything) the Democrats have done so far, no matter how radical. But guess what? She’s up for a re-election battle in November.

The polls must indicate that removing Title 42 is incredibly unpopular.

Plus, reports of “severe tension”:

Of the numerous inquiries sent out by Fox News Digital, several members of Congress refused to comment on the subject that has caused severe tension among members in the party.

Although I’m not sure this all isn’t just theater, about two weeks ago (April 7) this bipartisan bill was proposed:

Congressman Jared Golden (ME-02), joined by Reps. Tony Gonzales (TX-23), Tom O’Halleran (AZ-01), August Pfluger (TX-07), Stephanie Murphy (FL- 07), Brian Fitzpatrick (PA-02), Chris Pappas (NH-01), Don Bacon (NE-02), Greg Stanton (AZ-09), and Maria Elvira Salazar (FL-27) introduced today the Public Health and Border Security Act of 2022. The bipartisan bill would prevent President Biden from lifting existing Title 42 immigration restrictions without a plan in place from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to address the expected surge of migrants at the Southern border.

Senators James Lankford (R-OK) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) introduced similar bipartisan legislation in the Senate earlier today…

The bill would prohibit the Biden Administration from ending Title 42 until 60 days after formally ending the COVID-19 public health emergency declaration. Within 30 days of ending the public health emergency, the President must submit a plan to process the migrant surge to Congress.

It sounds like the bill could pass both House and Senate. But do they have the support to override a presidential veto?

Some person or people in the White House must think that rescinding Title 42 is of the utmost importance, even if it harms the re-election chances of Democrats in Congress. Then again, the White House powers that be might be thinking that they’ve already harmed those chances plenty already, so it would be hard to make things much worse.

To mask or not to mask?

The New Neo Posted on by

That is the question.

Or rather, that is a question – a question different places answer differently. For example:

The ruling appeared to free operators to make their own decisions about mask requirements, with the several major airlines — Delta, American, Southwest, JetBlue and United — all announcing they would make masks optional, but New York City’s public transit system is keeping the mandate in place.

MTA communications director Tim Minton said the system was “continuing to follow CDC guidelines and will review the Florida court order.”

I’m not sure I believe this poll, but here’s what it says:

The poll by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research finds that despite opposition to that requirement that included verbal abuse and physical violence against flight attendants, 56% of Americans favor requiring people on planes, trains and public transportation to wear masks, compared with 24% opposed and 20% who say they’re neither in favor nor opposed. Interviews for the poll were conducted Thursday to Monday, shortly before a federal judge in Florida struck down the national mask mandate on airplanes and mass transit. Airlines and airports immediately scrapped their requirements that passengers wear face coverings.

My guess is that the results would be different if taken now.

And this is no surprise:

The poll shows a wide partisan divide on the issue. Among Democrats, 80% favor and just 5% oppose the requirement. Among Republicans, 45% are opposed compared with 33% in favor, with 22% saying neither.

Watch out for Captain Hook

The New Neo Posted on by

But not for the usual reasons.

For this reason:

Disney execs worried that Tinker Bell and Captain Hook were “potentially problematic” during their review of content headed to the new Disney+ streaming service, the New York Times reports…

…[T]hey reportedly fretted over Captain Hook because [he] has a disability but likes to do villainous things, and that could be considered by some to be discriminatory.

But I thought that entire issue had already been addressed in the non-Disney musical “Peter Pan,” which I saw with great delight as a very young child in a real live theater – perhaps the first one I ever attended. I was fortunate enough to see the greatest Captain Hook ever, Cyril Ritchard. This Hook celebrates his awfulness, and is proud of being the “slimiest” and “creepiest.” So quick – before someone bans him, too:

ADDENDUM: The Florida Senate has passed a law to end Disney’s special tax privileges. It is expected to clear the House as well.]

Doxxer Taylor Lorenz thinks she’s the real victim

The New Neo Posted on by

I haven’t followed this story and before today probably hadn’t even heard of Taylor Lorenz. But it’s quite a tale. This is what the WaPo has descended to (it’s not the only pernicious thing the WaPo has descended to, not by a longshot, but it’s pretty awful). The tweets at that link are by Glenn Greenwald, but here are a few excerpts:

F****** unbelievable: @TaylorLorenz, after sobbing on national TV 2 weeks ago, claiming she’s the victim of “harassment,” showed up at the house of the relatives of the citizen behind @libsoftiktok and badgered them, according to @libsoftiktok

The bullies claim to be bullied.

What’s the new journalistic principle being applied? Is it now permissible for journalists to investigate and expose the real identity of any anonymous social media user? Or is it just permissible if the anonymous social media user has a certain kind of politics?

Yes, liberals worship giant media corporations and think their resources shouldn’t be used against powerful institutions like the CIA or NSA or Pentagon but against private, anonymous citizens with bad politics. That’s what they think “journalism” is.

More here:

Lorenz, the former New York Times journalist [presently with the WaPo] who earlier this month broke down in tears on MSNBC while recounting “harassment” she has experienced online, published an article on Tuesday revealing the identity of the social media user…

In response to criticism that she targeted a private citizen who wished to remain anonymous, Lorenz tweeted that the social media user “isn’t just some average woman with a social media account” but is instead a “powerful influencer operating a massively impactful right wing media shaping discourse around LGBTQ+ rights.”…

In a segment that aired April 1 on MSNBC’s Meet the Press Daily, Lorenz revealed that online harassment targeting her and her family caused her to experience “severe PTSD” and contemplate suicide in the recent past.

MSNBC’s segment detailed how Fox News host Tucker Carlson ripped Lorenz in March 2021 for calling for an end to online harassment.

At the time, Lorenz, then a reporter for the New York Times, said she had endured a “smear campaign” that had “destroyed her life.”

Targeting private citizens, as well as sometimes doxxing them, is the new m.o. of the MSM and of the left. I’m trying to recall when this sort of thing started, and it seems to me that – like so many things that are bad – it began in 2008 during the Obama campaign. Wasn’t the first victim Joe the Plumber? At least, that’s my recollection.

It spread to involve minors with the Nick Sandmann incident, and was incredibly vicious and obviously mendacious to anyone who spent even a small amount of time researching the facts. The demonization and exposure of a 16-year-old minding his own business was extraordinary, and included “journalists”. Ultimately, the WaPo paid Sandmann money in a defamation suit settlement, but it apparently wasn’t enough money to hurt them very much.

ADDENDUM: Here’s what Libs of Tik Tok does, by the way:

The account “Libs of TikTok” is a treasure trove of content that gathers and posts bizarre videos from radical leftists and protected groups that fall under their intersectional umbrella. They don’t edit it in any way, they just rip and post. The most they add is a little blurb for the tweet.

They don’t need to add anything, anyway. The content speaks for itself…

It shouldn’t be a surprise that the left is horrified by its own ideas being exposed to the world in such a way, and so it set out to shoot the messenger. Twitter suspended it for no legitimate reason, leading many to surmise that the real reason was that it was effective at helping the left expose themselves.

The airline mask mandate appears to be over

The New Neo Posted on by

I’m still out west, so this affects me personally because in a little while I’m due to return home. I flew out on a trip that for various reasons (mostly a long delay in the airport) took about 18 hours, and had to wear a mask the entire time.

One of the ways I dealt with it on the trip out here was to sip my club soda very very slowly, maskless. No one ever bothered me about it.

My grandchildren have colds, and I bet I’ll get one from them. I know it’s colds they have and not COVID, because the whole family already had COVID back in February – fortunately, without any serious complications. So I’m not even sure yet what I’ll do on the way home. But it’s great to have the choice.

Now it seems the Biden administration has given up on reinstating the mask mandate for public transportation, after a judge declared that it exceeded federal powers:

On Monday, a federal judge struck down the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) federal mask mandate for public transportation.

U.S. District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle ruled that the mandate “exceeded the CDC’s statutory authority, improperly invoked the good cause exception to notice and comment rulemaking, and failed to adequately explain its decisions,” and wrote, “the Court declares unlawful and vacates the Mask Mandate.”…

“The agencies are reviewing the decision and assessing potential next steps,” an administration official said in a statement. “In the meantime, today’s court decision means CDC’s public transportation masking order is not in effect at this time. Therefore, TSA will not enforce its Security Directives and Emergency Amendment requiring mask use on public transportation and transportation hubs at this time. CDC recommends that people continue to wear masks in indoor public transportation settings.”

What a long strange masked trip it’s been – so far.