Saturday Q&A

As you will see when you get to the question of the week, there are a LOT of good movies set in California.

This got pretty long, so we're going to hold a couple of questions that we originally posted. They'll show up next week.

Current Events

P.R. in Arvada, CO, asks: What advice do you have for anyone going out to take part in protests this weekend? We all know there is currently a desperate attempt to spin these protests as complete anarchy even though they don't rise to the level of Lakers fans after a win, so how would you advise people to make sure any negative optics are of law enforcement and not of protesters?

Also, am I the only person who really hopes the baby Trump balloon makes an appearance at his birthday parade?

(V) & (Z) answer: First, do not commit any acts of violence (obviously), and do not touch, in any way, anyone charged with law enforcement (police, National Guard, etc.). No matter how benign the contact, and no matter how justifiable it might be, both the law and public opinion are heavily stacked against a civilian in this situation.

Second, try to look as positive and upbeat as you can. Protesters who look hopeful are much more sympathetic than protesters who look angry, particularly in photos and video footage.

Third, tell someone that you are protesting, and which protest you are going to. Perhaps even arrange to check in with them when you get back home. This is a government that disappears people, and if you end up as one of the unlucky ones (considerably more likely if you are brown), it matters that your arrest be discovered as soon as possible, and that you get a lawyer who can file a habeas corpus petition as soon as possible.

As to the baby Trump balloon, we doubt the Secret Service would tolerate it. However, there is already footage of a man in a Trump "king" costume, complete with giant codpiece, all over social media right now. The footage was taken at Union Station in D.C., so presumably he will be present at the parade.

---

S.L. in Glendora, CA, asks: Is this meme true?



One of my Facebook friends posted it and another immediately disputed it, mentioning that, in fact, a significant parade was held while Eisenhower, among others, was president. How is Trump's parade different from the others?

(V) & (Z) answer: If you will look carefully, you will see that the person who created the meme has been a curious blend of honest and sneaky. They make clear that these are not actually Eisenhower's words, they are a characterization of Eisenhower's views by historian Michael Beschloss. However, that note is put in small, dark print, so it's easy to miss.

Anyhow, this is a pretty fair description of Ike's thinking, even though he never said or wrote these particular words. Oh, and the only parades held while Eisenhower was president were his two inaugural parades. You can see some footage of one of them here. It is true that there are military personnel participating. There are also drum majorettes, marching bands, floats with patriotic themes and Western riders doing tricks on their horses. Nobody could possibly mistake this for a military parade.

---

W.R.S. in Tucson, AZ, asks: I've been reading that the President may send the National Guard and/or other branches of the military to multiple U.S. cities to suppress peaceful protests.

He also seems to want troops along the border with Mexico, troops to potentially invade Greenland with, troops to parade down the streets of D.C., and presumably troops for some actual defense of the country.

So my question is: Does the U.S. have a large enough standing military to occupy every city where protests spring up while also accomplishing anything else? On the flip side, is there a number of protests that would represent a critical mass that could not be effectively suppressed?

(V) & (Z) answer: There are around 750,000 members of the National Guard, along with roughly 1.25 million active-duty troops.

If you assume a world in which every single one of those people could be deployed to America's cities, and every one of them proves willing to follow such an order, then there's about enough troops to give the "L.A. Treatment" (roughly 5,000 troops) to 500 cities. That's pretty good coverage; it gets you every city larger than Flower Mound, TX (pop. 68,609).

Of course, it's not actually possible to deploy/re-deploy the entire U.S. Armed Forces, for a variety of reason. We would guess the actual upper limit is something like 1 million deployments (most of the National Guard, plus some active-duty military). Meanwhile, Los Angeles is not actually "out of control" right now, which is why 5,000 troops are enough (are overkill, in fact). If we use the 1992 Los Angeles Riots as a guideline, then it took 10,000 National Guard troops to restore order. At that level, and with 1,000,000 troops available, the administration would only be able to cover the country's 100 largest cities. That gets you every city larger than North Las Vegas, NV (pop. 226,877).

At that point, things are starting to get spread pretty thin, especially since people who are participating in resistance are generally clever enough to go where law enforcement is not present. Further, such broad deployment would be a PR nightmare, and would surely cause the resistance to spread well beyond 100 cities. Oh, and let's not forget that all of this has to be paid for, and members of Congress are not likely to sign the check if their state is being invaded.

What it amounts to is that if the administration can focus on a few cities at a time, it likely has enough troop strength, etc., to get away with it. If the number climbs into the double digits, then it starts to get difficult. If the number climbs into the triple digits, then it's going to be disastrous.

---

R.R. in Pasadena, CA, asks: There is no Apple Store in downtown L.A.; the closest store looks like it's the one in Glendale, with other stores at The Grove, Santa Monica, and Pasadena. I checked a couple news reports and they just say that an Apple Store was looted, as well as an Adidas store. There is an Adidas store downtown, but it's blocks away from the federal buildings where the protests have been held. Has there been confirmation about what was actually looted? It sure feels like the looters were just taking advantage of the police being busy bullying protesters to get a five-finger discount on some nice sneakers.

(V) & (Z) answer: There actually is an Apple Store in downtown, but it's easy to miss because it's in a historic building, and Apple agreed to maintain the historic facade, with the result being that it actually looks like a theater from outside. And indeed, the store is called the Apple Tower Theatre. There are pictures of the building with graffiti on it, and Apple has said that some phones were stolen, so it's fair to think that the stories of it (and the Adidas Store) being looted are true (for those who are interested, the two stores are 4-5 blocks north of the famous Bradbury Building, which has featured in many movies, perhaps most obviously Blade Runner).

It is nearly impossible to know what the relationship is between the protesters and the looters. Sometimes, looters are just opportunists. Sometimes, they are protesters making some sort of statement. Sometimes, they are both. What's clear is that a couple of looted stores, and a few burning Waymos, are pretty low-level stuff, and do not demand a response from 5,000 military personnel.

---

E.W. in Skaneateles, NY, asks: When J.S. in Houston was messing around with time travel, it must have sent some stray tachyons to my smartphone because I received a garbled Electoral-Vote.com post from sometime in the 2030s (possibly 2033, but it is hard to tell exactly). It reads, "After the disaster that was Trump's second term and its electoral fallout, the Republican Party made much-needed reforms, including... They also modified their stances on ... in order to become more popular with the American people. Time will tell if they achieve success, but rising stars such as ... might be able to lead the Republican Party out of the electoral wilderness." It is difficult to tell if this message is coming from the Electoral-Vote.com on Earth-616, or from some other part of the multiverse. Regardless, could you please do your best to fill in the blanks?

(V) & (Z) answer: First blank: "Overhauling their primary/caucus process, moving some blue/moderate states further up the list, and getting rid of winner-take-all primaries, so that it's much less easy for an extreme candidate to get a stranglehold on the nomination early..."

Second blank: "Immigration, recognizing that a sane immigration policy is good for America and is one of the legacies of Ronald Reagan, and also that Latino voters are much more a growth opportunity than racist voters..."

Third blank: "Rep. David Valadao (R-CA), who positioned himself for this new era by voting for impeachment in 2020, and who has taken moderate stances on 'culture wars' issues..."

Note to readers: This is not a prediction of what will happen, or what should happen, merely the most plausible way to fill in the blanks, if we accept the premise(s) of the question.

---

G.L. in Oviedo, FL, asks: I have seen pictures, or rather photo-ops, where DHS secretary Kristi Noem is in El Salvador and now L.A., but I don't see how she is helping in either place. What is she getting out of these appearances? Is she planning to run for president?

(V) & (Z) answer: We'll give you some possibilities; we don't know which one is correct:

• Noem may think there is a presidential run in her future. If so, she's delusional, because she's too kooky and too far-right for the American electorate. Oh, and she's also a dog killer. Still, politics is full of people who think much more highly of themselves than they should.
  
  
• Noem thinks some other Washington job is in her future, either a post in the Cabinet of the next Republican president, or a U.S. Senate seat. Both South Dakota senators are in their 70s, and clearly Noem can win statewide.
  
  
• Noem is pretty much the prototype of what Fox and the other right-wing entertainment channels are looking for, and they pay very well, so she may be conducting an extended audition.
  
  
• MAGA has much in common with a cult, and in cults the members work desperately to please their Dear Leader. So, Noem might just be performing in exchange for a desperately desired kind word/pat on the head from Trump.

It's very likely to be one of these things. It could be more than one. The only thing that is certain is that Noem does not care for South Dakota, and is not looking for something that would land her back in her "home" state.

---

D.S. in Layton, UT, asks: This is going around Instagram: "Donald Trump has just banned a series of famous American books at the Pentagon schools, including To kill a Mockingbird and Fahrenheit 451, a book about banning books."

Is it true?

(V) & (Z) answer: We would say it is more true than it is untrue.

The Trump administration, and more specifically the Department of Defense, have issued broad guidelines for the books they want to see removed from DoD schools. And, at the moment, DoD schools are going through their collections to identify and evaluate books that maybe should be removed from shelves.

The schools are largely keeping their activities quiet, in hopes of minimizing blowback as much as possible, and are not willing to answer questions from reporters or parents. However, the ACLU has gathered enough information to file a lawsuit, and to make claims about specific books that are being targeted. Among the books named in the ACLU's suit are, indeed, To kill a Mockingbird and Fahrenheit 451.

So, has Donald Trump personally banned those two books throughout the DoD educational system? No. Has the Trump administration taken actions that may cause those books to be removed from shelves in SOME schools in the DoD educational system? Yes.

Politics

R.J. in Chicago, IL, asks: You wrote: "People in general, and Americans in particular, are prone to various forms of conspiratorial thinking."

Why is it that Americans are more prone to conspiratorial thinking? And what's the best way to fight conspiratorial thinking?

(V) & (Z) answer: Everyone who has studied this subject agrees that this is the case; there isn't much consensus as to WHY it is the case.

That said, it is at least partly a product of a political system that has only two viable parties. There have been many studies that show that whatever party is in power, the number of conspiracy theories circulated by members of the OTHER party goes way up. Sometimes, this is the best/only way to undermine an opponent (think of Barack Obama, who was squeaky-clean, and so many Republicans turned to birth certificate/closet Muslim nonsense). It's also a way that some people who feel marginalized reclaim a bit of power, as they feel they are now "insiders" who are privy to a powerful secret or secrets.

Another component is almost certainly American religion. We have written about this before, but some religious traditions (e.g., Judaism) encourage adherents to believe, but also to think critically, including about religious doctrine. Religious scholars use the phrase "rational inquiry" to describe this. Other religions, and certain flavors of American-style evangelicalism are high on this list, encourage people to accept things as a matter of faith, and not to ask questions. Once you are conditioned to do that, you are at least somewhat primed for conspiratorial thinking.

It is nearly impossible to fight conspiratorial thinking, we are sorry to say. First, the fact that the person has gone down that road shows they don't really care about evidence. Second, the foundation of any conspiracy theory is that your objections/counter-arguments are part of the conspiracy. So, expressing those things actually deepens the person's commitment to the conspiratorial thinking. All you can really do is ignore/shun conspiratorial thinkers, because that deprives them of what they most want, which is attention.

---

D.R. in Oakland, CA, asks: What ever happened to "Antifa"?

Did Joe Biden get rid of it?

Or did it collide with "fa" and get annihilated?

(V) & (Z) answer: It became less effective as a talking point, and so was supplanted by CRT. And when that began to lose salience, it was replaced by DEI. If you look at the rhetoric, these three terms (plus "woke" and several others) are basically interchangeable.

---

B.W.S. in Pleasant Valley, NY, asks: How much of what we're seeing from 47 is coming from Trump himself, and how much of it is Stephen Miller acting in Trump's name? Also, if the latter, what are the implications of that, and how illegal is it?

(V) & (Z) answer: We don't think Donald Trump is so far gone that he's just a ventriloquist dummy being controlled by a puppet master. We suspect that Stephen Miller, and probably a few others, have learned to "persuade" Trump, such that he thinks their ideas are his own.

Even if Miller really was running the show, it would be nearly impossible to prove or to prosecute. When Edith Bolling Wilson basically took over for her husband in 1919-20, relatively few people knew, and those who did know couldn't have proven it in a court of law, because she kept things behind closed doors.

---

F.S. in Cologne, Germany, asks: Conservatives seem to believe that federal employees aren't hardworking people and earn too much money. Is there any way to disprove this claim?

(V) & (Z) answer: The best way is for people to personally feel the pinch when federal employees aren't there to do their jobs. Given the "work" of DOGE, we may be able to see this put to the test, if seniors start having trouble getting answers from the Social Security Administration, or veterans have to wait 6 months for an appointment at the VA.

---

R.C. in Des Moines, IA, asks: How likely is it that Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) flips to the GOP?

(V) & (Z) answer: There are two ways to answer this. The first is to assume he's a rational political actor. If this is so, there is little chance that he flips. Senators who change parties mid-term have very poor track records when it comes to being reelected. That includes senators from Pennsylvania who change parties mid-term (e.g., Arlen Specter). If Fetterman runs for reelection, he'd be a huge favorite to remain the Democratic candidate, and then he'd run in the general as the best/only option for Democrats, but someone who some Republicans could think about voting for. On the other hand, he's not especially aligned with the Republicans on most issues, and if he actually was a Republican, nearly all Democratic votes would vanish, so he probably wouldn't even make it out of the primary.

The second way of answering this question begins with the presumption that he's no longer a rational actor. There have been numerous stories that he's become erratic in meetings, and uninterested in his job. We noted, this week, that he had dinner with Steve Bannon. What came out, after we wrote it, was that the night of that dinner was... also Fetterman's wedding anniversary. There is also gossip that Gisele Fetterman has become alienated from her husband, and has asked where the man she married has gone. If all of this gossip is on point, he may no longer be in his right mind, and he may not care about getting reelected. In that case, all bets are off, and anything is possible.

---

M.D.H. in Coralville, IA, asks: I'm seeing lots of banner ads claiming a bipartisan proposal to force more competition for the main credit card processing companies will hurt consumers, and other ads claiming the opposite. I assume the ads saying it will hurt consumers are paid for by the banking industry and the ads saying it will benefit consumers are paid for by the retail industry. When I search for information on this issue, nearly all the hits appear to have been paid for by either bankers or retailers.

Do you know of a neutral website that analyzes the claims and reveals the truth?

(V) & (Z) answer: We are leery of the use of "the truth" in this context. There's undoubtedly "truth" on both sides. Also, nobody can really know the impact of a policy until that policy is in place.

That said, the question you ask is pretty much the raison d'être for the site Nerdwallet.com. Their assessment of this legislation (which is not particularly close to becoming law) is here.

Civics

D.K. in Iowa City, IA, asks: Could Nikola Tesla's descendants sue Elon Musk for using his name?

(V) & (Z) answer: There is a hard answer to this question and an easy answer. We will start with the hard answer. What you are referring to is called personality rights (or, sometimes, right of publicity). It is an area of the law that is fairly new and is poorly defined. There is no federal law on this subject, and there's only been one Supreme Court case (Zacchini v. Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co.). Most of the law that does exist is at the state level, and there is wide variance among the states that do have such laws. You could probably guess one of the two states that give descendants the most substantive personality rights, namely California, because that state was home to many movie stars whose image is still very valuable, like Marilyn Monroe and Humphrey Bogart. The other state is... Tennessee. In case readers will care to guess why before seeing the explanation, we will put the explanation at the bottom of the page.

Broadly speaking, even in California and Tennessee, personality rights are supposed to last just 70 years beyond the death of the person in question. Since Nikola Tesla died in 1943, he's outside that window. That said, courts have sometimes granted extensions for various reasons, so it's not an absolute certainty that a lawsuit trying to assert Tesla's personality rights would fail. It's just likely.

And now, the easy answer. Tesla never married, never had children, and may well have died a virgin. So, he has no descendants, and thus there is nobody to file suit. There are undoubtedly fifth cousins out there somewhere, but no state has allowed personality rights to pass to anyone other than named heirs or direct descendants.

---

P.L. in Denver, CO, asks: So, we know that the DOGE team has been scooping up our data. If, down the road, there is evidence that Elon Musk (or other DOGE members) are using this collected data for some personal means (which I believe is likely) there should be legal recourse. Am I wrong?

(V) & (Z) answer: You're not wrong. Elon Musk and the other DOGEys have opened themselves up to both civil torts and criminal actions. And since most of the relevant laws are state laws, a presidential pardon is of no use.

Truth be told, we would be somewhat surprised if there is NOT a class-action suit against Musk at some point. He's got very deep pockets, and the law is very clear, so why not take a shot? This is what should have him sleeping badly at night; even $400 billion doesn't go too far if you have to pay off 100 million defendants.

---

G.W. in Oxnard, CA, asks: The lawsuits have been flying fast since the beginning of the current presidential term, and it is difficult to keep track and even to remember all the legal action. If the behavior of the administration is any guide, then there will be many more legal actions, possibly hundreds. Is there some website that gives a legal scorecard in a form digestible by nonlawyers? You do items on the latest legal news, but I'm losing sight of the stuff on the back burners, and it is going to get worse.

(V) & (Z) answer: There are two very good trackers; one from Lawfare and one from Just Security. We tend to prefer the latter because it is more detailed.

As a bonus, we'll also pass along this site, which is a tracker of... all the different Trump trackers. Readers might peruse the list and find a tracker or two that is of interest.

---

M.M. in Plano, TX, asks: Could George W. Bush receive the Nobel for PEPFAR? This initiative saved millions of African lives.

(V) & (Z) answer: In contrast to the other Nobels, the Peace Prize tends to be aspirational. That is to say, it's not as much a reward for past work as it is encouragement for future work. That's why they gave the award, for example, to Shimon Peres and Yasser Arafat—the Committee was trying to encourage the two factions to keep working toward a permanent peace. Obviously, this approach sometimes works out poorly.

This being the case, PEPFAR is unlikely to win a Nobel, since it is past work. It also does not help that many Europeans still see Bush as a warmonger (not without reason). That said, if PEPFAR really does get cut off, and if the harm from that quickly becomes evident, it's at least possible that the Committee might give Bush the Nobel, so as to make the statement: "We would like to see this resume, IMMEDIATELY."

History

M.S. in Hamden, CT, asks: Your statement that "If you made a list of the 10 worst Cabinet nominations in history, Trump v2.0 might well claim half the list" got my attention. So, who's on your list? (Feel free to slot in Trump v2.0 folks if you want.) To be fair and to allow the candidates to show their worth(lessness), let's go for appointees rather than nominees.

(V) & (Z) answer: Beyond the terms you have laid out, we are going to add two additional conditions. First, there are hundreds of Cabinet appointees who were chosen for patronage purposes, rather than for their qualifications. So, being a patronage pick is not enough to make the list. Second, the person's flaws as a candidate must have been evident, at least on some level, at the time of their nomination. If the apple turns rotten after taking over their Cabinet post, that's really not the nominating president's fault. At least, not enough to enter "ten worst" territory.

With that out of the way, here are the ten worst Cabinet picks, in chronological order, prior to Trump v2.0:

1. John C. Calhoun (Secretary of State, 1844-45): This was his second time in the Cabinet, he was also Secretary of War from 1817-25. However, by 1844, everyone knew he was a traitor and an insurrectionist, and yet he was appointed anyhow. And once he was running State, he helped add Texas to the union and did what he could to instigate the Mexican-American War, two events that helped precipitate the Civil War.
   
   
2. John B. Floyd (Secretary of War, 1857-61): He was most certainly a Southerner (lifelong resident of Virginia) and he embraced the notions of nullification and potential secession. He was nonetheless appointed to a critical position at a time when the nation was in a very delicate condition. And as Secretary, once it became clear that the union was likely to dissolve, he took steps to relocate armaments and other materiel to armories in Southern states, so they would be easy to seize. Could the Confederacy have held on in the early months of the war, but for the assist from Floyd? Could they have lasted as long as they did, but for the assist from Floyd? It's hard to know, but there's a fair chance that the blood of tens of thousands of men, or maybe even hundreds of thousands of men, is on Floyd's hands.
   
   
3. Columbus Delano (Secretary of the Interior, 1870-75): Before being confirmed, Delano was a spoilsman who had expressed terribly racist ideas about the Native Americans. Once he was in office, he looked the other way as out-of-control corruption overtook his department, leading to the infamous Whiskey Ring scandal, and he imposed harsh measures on the Natives, designed to break up the tribes.
   
   
4. A. Mitchell Palmer (Attorney General, 1919-21): He had a history of disdain for the Constitution before becoming AG, so it's hardly a surprise that he ran roughshod over the Constitution once he was running the Department of Justice.
   
   
5. Albert B. Fall (Secretary of the Interior, 1921-23): He had a long track record of unethical behavior, in both his political and legal careers, and was something of a spoilsman even when such people were quickly becoming an endangered species. And once he was in the Cabinet, he was responsible for what was then the greatest political scandal in American history.
   
   
6. John Mitchell (Attorney General, 1969-72): He managed Richard Nixon's reelection campaign, which means he was very much a part of setting up the White House Plumbers, ordering the Watergate break-in, etc. This kind of behavior was not a problem for Nixon, of course, though it should have been for the senators, at least some of whom must have known. At very least, they could have insisted on the usual background check, which Nixon specifically asked the FBI to skip, since he knew full well it would turn up all kinds of dirt. Once Mitchell was in office, he continued his sleazy ways, including ordering illegal wiretaps, doing what he could to punish Nixon's enemies, and trying to put shady cronies on the Supreme Court.
   
   
7. Earl Butz (Secretary of Agriculture, 1971-76): Not only was he 100% in the pocket of Big Agriculture, he also had a long history of racist remarks. Being far too cozy with the folks we was supposed to be regulating did not turn out to be a problem, but the racist remarks did. He got in big trouble for mocking the pope with an exaggerated Italian accent, and then he was brought down after making a joke that was both vulgar and racist in front of reporters.
   
   
8. James Watt (Secretary of the Interior, 1981-83): He proudly branded himself an "anti-environmentalist" and worked for many years as lobbyist for petroleum interests. Once he became secretary, he eagerly began opening up Western lands to petroleum interests. Who saw that coming? He was also an early culture warrior who often said there are two kinds of people in the U.S.: Americans and liberals. His loose lips eventually sank his ship; he was forced to resign after a speech in which he complained/joked that he was having trouble getting things done because the people immediately under him were "a black, a woman, two Jews and a cripple."
   
   
9. Rick Perry (Secretary of Energy, 2017-19): He is dumb as a stump, didn't even know what his Cabinet department does, and once ran for president on a promise to eliminate that department (again, not actually knowing what it does). What's not to like?
   
   
10. Bill Barr (Attorney General, 2019-20): We are specifically referring to his second stint as AG here. He had already shown himself to be, in effect, a Mafia-style fixer, having swept most of the Iran-Contra scandal under the rug during his first term as AG. He sailed through confirmation, and... went right back to sweeping things, like the Mueller Report, under the rug.

Among the current Cabinet members, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, DNI Tulsi Gabbard, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy and AG Pam Bondi would almost certainly make the list above. There are all grossly unqualified, and in some cases might be called anti-qualified (if that's a word); Kennedy is actively hostile to the science that is key to his department's work and Gabbard is likely a Russian asset. They all four have a record of kookiness, and they also have various forms of corrupt behavior on their ledgers. Hegseth also appears to be something close to a white supremacist. All of these things were known before their confirmation hearings.

---

R.C. in Eagleville, PA, asks: I get it from your short history of the Watts Riots that we'll never know the sparks that set off the Riots. At that time, I very specifically remember being told that some jerk threw an orange at a police officer and that was a precipitating factor. I'm now curious, have you heard of the orange story? Is it urban legend?

(V) & (Z) answer: There are many accounts of things being thrown, including some that mention oranges being thrown. There are also many accounts of the officer who was handling the traffic stop (Lee Minikus) striking the allegedly drunk motorist (Marquette Frye) with his baton. It is extremely probable that all of these accounts are basically accurate. The problem is... which came first? Because that is where the rub is, and that is the part that is unknown.

---

M.A. in Knoxville, TN, asks: You have used the phrase "gave it the old college try" before, most recently in your piece Friday about military theater in California. I understand what it means, but I'm curious if you know of its origins? I believe I first ran across it in one of Terry Pratchett's Discworld novels, so it's probably not something U.S. specific.

(V) & (Z) answer: To start, you have to understand that all Britons secretly want to be Americans. This is why, for example, the world's largest McDonald's is in London. So, the use of American phraseology in a work by a British author is par for the course.

In any event, there is no question that the phrase did originate in the United States, and that it emerged sometime in the early 1900s. These things can be learned by looking at books and newspapers, and seeing when the phrase began to appear.

What's not clear is the original meaning. The likeliest explanation is that it came from the world of baseball, as there was something of a cultural divide, at that time, between those major leaguers who had played in college and those who had not (this was one of several sources of tension between college grad Lou Gehrig and non-grad Babe Ruth, the two great Yankee stars). It may have been a way of mocking the collegians, with the notion being that they may have tried hard to make a play, but they didn't have the skill to actually pull it off.

Fun Stuff

E.S. in Cincinnati, OH asks: Is it true that a certain number of the folks who developed cell phone technology ere specifically inspired by their love of the original Star Trek?

(V) & (Z) answer: Yes. There are several documentaries that interview people who confirm this, most obviously How William Shatner Changed the World. Note that the influence was primarily on the look and feel of cell phones (particularly flip phones). The idea of being able to communicate wirelessly, over long distances, was not something that people needed to watch a TV show to think of.

---

S.M. in Nice, France, asks: (Z), as a lifelong LA resident, who are the biggest movie stars you've bumped into/encountered?

Like Jack Nicholson, for instance? (For the record, he's like God to me, and was just a few feet away from me once in Saint-Tropez, and I didn't notice his presence until it was too late. It was 19 years ago and I still can't get over it...)

(V) & (Z) answer: There are a couple of... challenges here, for lack of a better term. The first is that the information is not organized in (Z)'s mind in quite that way. If you ask "Have you seen Jack Nicholson?" (and Z has, numerous times), that's easy enough to answer. But if you ask "Who have you seen?", the answer is not at his fingertips.

The second problem is that many celebrities look very different in person than they do when they are appearing in a film or on a TV program. This is particularly true of actresses, for the obvious reason that they tend to wear more make-up when they are at work. For example, (Z) once saw a woman eating at a local breakfast joint called Huckleberry. She was familiar in the way that a high school classmate is familiar, and so he tried to figure out who it was. He eventually realized it was Hilary Swank, shortly after she won her second Oscar. She's much shorter in person, and much more dark-complected, than you would otherwise think. And on the subject of breakfast, (Z) used to see Arnold Schwarzenegger at the now out-of-business Bread & Porridge fairly regularly (Schwarzenegger lives in Brentwood and would arrive on his motorcycle). (Z) would also see Harrison Ford at the now out-of-business OP Cafe fairly regularly (Ford houses one of his planes at the airport down the street). At another restaurant (can't remember the name), a woman at the next table over was being very obnoxious to the staff. (Z) did not know until someone told him later that the obnoxious woman was Jennifer Lopez.

(Z) used to be a fairly regular guest at the house of a friend's uncle. The uncle was, for many years, manager to Jim Carrey, and so Carrey was at the house a couple of times when (Z) was there. Further, the house was at the apex of Mulholland Drive, on a stretch that was known back then as something like "Bad Boy Way" because of all the "Bad Boy" actors from the 1960s and 1970s who had houses there. So, while visiting the uncle's house (almost always to watch football games), (Z) would see Nicholson, Warren Beatty and Marlon Brando on a somewhat regular basis.

Moving along, due to a friend with some good connections (not the uncle), (Z) once had prime seats to a Paul McCartney concert. And he and his date arrived early, such that he was there to see all the celebrities who were sitting in the same section. As a general rule, the celebrity would arrive, and people would whisper "Hey, that's [CELEBRITY X]!" and then the celebrity would try to find their seat in as low-profile a manner as was possible, since they were there to be a concertgoer that night, and not to be "on the clock." Among the folks sitting within 10-15 feet of (Z) were Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman, Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson, Steven Spielberg (Z also went to grad school with his brother-in-law) and two of the four Monkees (Davy Jones was seated directly behind Z). The only celebrity who seemed to enjoy being recognized was Sylvester Stallone, who did the Rocky "Put my fists in the air, because I won the fight" gesture when people began to recognize him.

There's a famous movie theater in Hollywood called the Cinerama Dome (currently closed) where it's fairly common to encounter industry types. (Z) has seen (and spoken to) Henry Winkler there more than once. He's also seen Larry David and Jerry Seinfeld, Jack Black and Will Ferrell there. At another theater (the Mann Westwood), he was in line for a Star Wars film right behing Elijah Wood, at the time when Wood was starring in the Lord of the Rings films. At still another theater (Grauman's Chinese), he saw a different Star Wars film with Leonardo DiCaprio sitting a few rows back. At still another theater (the New Beverly), he saw (and spoke to) the owner of the theater, Quentin Tarantino, and his special guest, Dan Aykroyd, as they were there to introduce a midnight showing of The Blues Brothers. For that matter, (Z) was also at the premiere of Blues Brothers 2000, and Aykroyd and John Goodman were sitting about 3 rows behind him. Oh, and (Z) was at the very first (pre-premiere) showing of the complete print of Armageddon. When he exited the show, super-producer Jerry Bruckheimer was standing in the back. (Z) asked: "Is it a happy ending because the world won, or because France lost?" Bruckheimer was not amused.

Speaking of snark, (Z) was once in line at Ralphs, and Mark Hamill got in line behind him, and was buying D batteries. It took all of (Z)'s willpower to resist the temptation to ask if those batteries were for his lightsaber. He thought Hamill might not be amused. That was 20-25 years ago; having seen Hamill's ex-Twitter feed, it seems probable he would have laughed. Similarly, at a market up the street from Ralphs (Vicente Foods), (Z) had to wait two minutes while some unknown person went to grab one last item. That person proved to be Ving Rhames; (Z) resisted the temptation to ask: "If I complained about you making me wait, would you get medieval on my ass?" Actually, it wasn't so much resisting the temptation, it's that Rhames was on his cell phone.

By virtue of having been a UCLA student at the right time, (Z) was classmates with a number of child stars of 1980s TV. He had classes with Jaleel White (Steve Urkel from Family Matters), Danica McKellar (Winnie Cooper from The Wonder Years and Mayim Bialik (Blossom from Blossom and The Big Bang Theory). Also, the UCLA men's gym back then had NBA-quality courts, but was very private and fairly well hidden. Court 3 was for amateurs like (Z), Court 2 was for players who had played varsity in high school, and Court 1 was for UCLA varsity players, other NCAA players, and NBA players looking to get some work in. So, he regularly saw Kobe Bryant and Shaquille O'Neal there, and a bunch of other NBA players. He also played against Grant Hill once, and has also met James Worthy (shops at the same Ralphs as Mark Hamill) and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (he's at UCLA a lot, not for basketball pursuits, but for literary pursuits). Naturally, (Z) met John Wooden several times before his passing. And one of (Z)'s professors (and later colleagues) is married to John Lithgow, so (Z) has talked to him many times.

Oh, and (Z)'s grandmother worked for Virginia Knott, who was next door neighbors with John Wayne. Wayne would come to (Z)'s grandmother's work on Fridays, when (Z) was there, as an infant. So, while (Z) can't remember it, he apparently met The Duke several times.

There are a lot more, but this is a reasonable rundown of some of the better anecdotes. Anyhow, on reading this, perhaps you can tell, consistent with the opening remark, that it was put together associatively, and that thinking of [X] was a reminder of [Y] and maybe [Z].

Gallimaufry

T.W. in Norfolk, England, UK, asks: I don't know how you do it. 12,000 words for one posting. According to Alexa, the average novel is about 60,000-80,000 words. You're basically writing a novel a week where I struggle and obsess over the language to use to write an intelligible e-mail!

I really want to say how much I value the effort you put into keeping the world informed. You are truly amazing and inspiring people. Have you ever considered writing an actual book, and if so what would it focus on?

(V) & (Z) answer: We thank you for the kind words. (V) has already written dozens of books in the area of computer science. (Z) has edited a couple of encyclopedias, and has a number of book projects he'll get to one of these days.

---

J.E. in Whidbey Island, WA, asks: I appreciate your use of URLs as footnotes in your posts. When something seems especially preposterous (which seems to be happening with increasing frequency), I feel compelled to look at the citation. However, sometimes I find that your link does not support the quotation. This week, for example, you referenced a Politico article, when you quoted The Convicted Felon (TCF) as saying, "[Gavin Newsom's] primary crime is running for governor because he's done such a bad job." But that text appears nowhere in the piece. Where could I find a source for that?

(V) & (Z) answer: It's here.

That said, we ran this question to explain two things. First, we usually rely on many sources for an item, but we usually link to only one or two, to keep things manageable. So, not everything we reference will necessarily be in that link. Second, we never, ever make things up. We may err, but if we have a direct quote, we got it from some legitimate source.

---

B.J. in Arlington, MA, asks: What is the oldest item on your back burner list that you still intend to get to?

(V) & (Z) answer: We did a series on scandals that still needs to be completed. There are a bunch of other things, including something that will move to the front burner in the next week or so after having been on the back burner for 2 years.

Reader Question of the Week: Forget It, Jake...

Here is the question we put before readers two weeks ago:

L.R.H. in Oakland, CA, asks: (Z) asserted that "Back to the Future [is] the very best movie to be set in California."

OK, but what other films are in the running, and why? (The movie need not be set entirely in California, but a significant portion should take place there.)

And here some of the answers we got in response:

D.B. in Fort Lauderdale, FL: As your tag line presages, I predict that the vast majority of the respondents to your question about the best movie set in California will be Chinatown. It certainly leads the pack if the question references the best movie that is about California, but it is less clear if the question is, as you frame it, the best movie that is set in California.

In the latter case, I would propose The Maltese Falcon, the pre-eminent movie among those that use the metaphor of the San Francisco fog (seen or just imagined) to remind us that all mysteries are basically about cover-ups—viz. Vertigo, Bullitt and, on a lighter note, Foul Play.

There is also a good case for the steady stream of L.A. noir and neo-noir movies that picture the City of Angels, a relative newcomer on the world's urban landscape, as the global locus for cynicism, greed, lust, and corruption—Double Indemnity, Mildred Pierce, The Postman Always Rings Twice, The Big Sleep, The Blue Dahlia, Gun Crazy, Harper, Chinatown, Devil in a Blue Dress, L.A. Confidential, Mulholland Drive.

But then we have to consider all the Hollywood movies about Hollywood movies, with their universal conceit that reality is an illusion, and only perception matters: A Star Is Born (all three versions), Sunset Boulevard, Singin' in the Rain, Postcards from the Edge, La La Land, Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood. And Hollywood-adjacent movies, such as my favorite, Shampoo, and Jerry Maguire.

Or those movies that show that it ain't easy being young in a land that worships youth: East of Eden, Rebel Without a Cause (where poor James Dean is tormented because his dad is a sissy), Gidget (watch it again, philistines), American Graffiti, Mommie Dearest (or is that a Hollywood movie?), Back to the Future, Clueless, Bring It On (highlighting young Californians of color for once), Shelter (the gay one). Not to mention The Graduate—that overwrought paean to ageism and misogyny, but with Anne Bancroft in one of the great performances of all time.

Of course, California movies also remind us that it is unpleasant to be poor in a land of plenty: Of Mice and Men (1939 and 1992), The Grapes of Wrath, Cannery Row, El Norte, Down and Out in Beverly Hills.

Okay, I digress and have gotten carried away. Loosen the thumbscrews so that I can cast my ballot, along with your other readers, for... Chinatown, a movie that is truly about California.

---

R.R. in Pasadena, CA: There are of course a lot of great movies set in California, and I'm going to predict that (Z) would include The Karate Kid on his list of great CA films. It's a film that landed about the same time that (Z) was in high school, so there's a nostalgia factor. It's got a good story, including things like a single mom trying to get by, and a kid dragged across the country trying to fit into a completely different culture. It does a good job of detailing California culture at the time, and being a teenager in general. And it has a lot of good performances in it. But, really, it has Pat Morita creating absolute movie magic, which Ralph Macchio manages to enhance with the way he reacts to this old Japanese maintenance man who turns out to be far more than he appears. And it's basically impossible not to root for Danny to win out in the end.

My own dark horse for this would be something no one really remembers, Blue Thunder. The ads make it look like a YAHOOO!!! helicopter adventure (and it is), but instead it's all about the militarization of the police and abuse of that power, and how good people can stand against that despite the possibly fatal risks. The performances really support this too, especially Roy Scheider, and then there's Malcolm McDowell having a great time being obnoxiously bad. It's a fun film with a pretty significant message that's especially relevant today when we have ICE agents deployed in full battle gear to capture a couple cooks at a restaurant.

---

P.M. in Port Angeles, WA: I admit to a bias, having lived in the Eastern end of Simi Valley for some 23 years. There is a mostly forgotten place called Corriganville, named for the stuntman known as "Crash" Corrigan. He bought a large tract of land and created a moviemaking theme park that was quite popular in its heyday. Many movies were filmed there, and my nomination is for the film Fort Apache. I spent many an hour wandering about and finding "Fort Apache" and the stage coach trail and reliving all those scenes of chase in so many westerns. Ray pioneered the concept of a theme park long before Walt build "Disneyland", but Disneyland endured, Corriganville didn't.

Oh, I may have misunderstood that by set, you meant the action was clearly portrayed in California, "Fort Apache" was construed to be in Arizona. In that case, my choices are Steve McQueen's Bullitt. The movie set the standard for the car chase and every movie after had to live up to that standard, with a culmination in The Fast and The Furious ensemble. My second choice is Jack Nicholson's Chinatown, a quintessential Film noir movie dealing with the never ending water wars of southern California.

Mulholland Drive is a classic, and a great sightseeing drive in its own right—you realize that there are just too many candidates to choose just one, I need ranked choice for this, so I'll end here with just three nominees.

---

C.T.P. in Lancaster, CA: It's A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World. I still remember the scene set at the grand opening of the gas station, with Jonathan Winters. Whenever I think of it, I laugh out loud.

---

E.G.G.-C. in Syracuse, NY: I can think of no other movie than Tarantino's Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood. It may be a very obvious choice, but that movie portrayed the late 60s in a very believable manner, especially Hollywood...

---

S.K. in Sunnyvale, CA: (Z) himself spoke highly of Star Trek movies II-IV, the last of which takes place mostly in San Francisco, and is even also a time travel movie. So presumably that film would be "in the running."

---

E.S. in Providence, RI: The answer is obviously Chinatown (one of the all time greats), but for fun I'll nominate Fast Times at Ridgemont High, which captured the zeitgeist of early 80's teen culture, and because Phoebe Cates in a bikini climbing out of a swimming pool.

---

H.C. in Richmond, VA: Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure not only features the fun time travel elements of Back to the Future, historical figures such as So-crates, Beeth-oven, Joan of Arc, and Lincoln, the talents of George Carlin and Keanu Reaves, but also the eternal message we should all live by: "Be excellent to each other... and party on dudes!"

---

R.B. in Cleveland, OH: SAN DIMAS HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL RULES!

---

M.H. in Seattle, WA: The answer arguably depends on the question "Where in California?"

For Los Angeles, I've long leaned into a trilogy providing a flavor of LA's history consisting of Chinatown, L.A. Confidential, and Tequila Sunrise. Crime, corruption, and moral ambiguity through the 20th century. Two of them written by Robert Towne. A barely disguised version of what was one of LA's great Italian restaurants. Multiple now problematic actors... sigh.

As someone who spent years living in the Santa Cruz area, The Lost Boys has a certain charm (even if Santa Cruz asked that the location name be changed).

For the Bay Area, it's hard to beat Vertigo though there is no bell tower at the actual mission.

For truly Northern California, I'll pick Racing with the Moon, which makes beautiful use of the Mendocino coast and features one of the few roles in which Sean Penn shows a soft side.

But to pick something that just feels very California, I am going to settle on Paul Thomas Anderson's Licorice Pizza.

---

G.R. in Tarzana, CA: I immediately had an answer as to the best movie ever to be set in California, but once I saw your preferred subject line, "Forget it, Jake!", I knew you already had it covered, so in the words of Emily Litella, "Never mind."

---

A.C. in Kingston, MA: Stipulating that Back to the Future is indeed the best movie set in California (it absolutely IS), the clear second-place finisher HAS to be So I Married an Axe Murder. Oscar winner Brenda Fricker as a chain-smoking Scottish conspiracy theorist, Alan Arkin as a too-nice police captain to Anthony LaPaglia's disillusioned detective, Amanda Plummer's delightful weirdness, dozens of quotable lines... even as his dementia progressed, my dad would remember and recite dialog with me, and now I do the same with my kids.

---

J.B. in Bozeman, MT: I nominate Little Miss Sunshine for your consideration. It is about a journey to California for better or exciting things (and seedy events too). Migration to The Golden State is a classic American theme and is a key part of California's identity perhaps as much as what happens in the state itself. The film's ensemble cast is wonderfully dysfunctional and very funny.

---

A.J. in Baltimore, MD: Sunset Boulevard is the best movie set in California, the best movie about the film industry, and one of the best movies ever made. The brilliant Billy Wilder was at the peak of his powers in conjuring this study of a washed-up star's addiction to the limelight. Part film-noir, part self-referential dark comedy, the film is rich with memorable dialogue and marvelous performances.

---

M.M. in San Diego, CA: Besides Chinatown, my favorite Southern California film is The Big Sleep. Raymond Chandler set everything in Los Angeles and its environs. There's even a cottage industry that tries to determine exact locations for every scene. Plus, there's a pair of academics at UCLA who specialize in everything Chandler, even locating the ashes of his wife and getting them interred at Ray's grave here in San Diego!

---

P.J.T. in Raton, NM: "Best" anything leaves me cynical because it assumes some sort of objective measure that's agreeable to a wide swath of "experts," self-appointed or otherwise anointed, which may be (somewhat, subject to new evidence) legitimate in the sciences, but is certainly not in the arts. I prefer the more-honest "favorite," which admits that the consideration is dictated purely by personal taste.

So, my favorite film set in California is D.A. Pennebaker's documentary, Monterey Pop. A brainchild of The Mamas and the Papas, the 1967 Monterey Pop Festival was described by Jefferson Airplane singer, Grace Slick, as a more satisfying experience than either Woodstock or (obviously) Altamont (Airplane played all three). Documenting the mother of all rock festivals, the film also includes performances by Simon & Garfunkel, Jimi Hendrix (famously lighting his guitar on fire), The Who, Hugh Masekela, Canned Heat, Janis Joplin, Otis Redding, Ravi Shankar, The Byrds, Country Joe and the Fish, and others (while leaving out acts—though included in the vinyl release—such as Lou Rawls, The Association, The Animals, Paul Butterfield Blues Band, Quicksilver Messenger Service, The Electric Flag, Buffalo Springfield, Booker T. and the M.G.s, The Blues Project and The Grateful Dead), but it also has a cultural significance beyond being the first "really big" rock festival, capturing in a musical nutshell the ethics and vibe of 1967, which is still known (and revered) today as The Summer of Love. Musically, it's been downhill ever since: name me a rock or pop festival (other than Woodstock 1969) that assembled talent this varied, committed and influential musically, socially and politically.

---

J.R. in Harrogate, England, UK: The Big Lebowski by Joel and Ethan Coen is set in Los Angeles, and should definitely be on this list.

The central theme of finding peace in yourself is reason enough to love this film, however, given the inability of the Left and the Right to even be in the same room together, the bond between the Dude and his friend Walter is an even better rationale for inclusion.

Their relationship transcends political differences and places two American archetypes that are normally in conflict into a friendship that transcends political ideology. In the immortal words of (the other) Mr. King, "Can't we all just get along?"

But let's be completely honest. Why should this film be on this list?

Because the Dude abides, and nobody fu**s with the Jesus.

---

M.A. in Park Ridge, IL: I have always loved American Graffiti. It captures the early-'60s innocence perfectly, it's funny, it's profound, and it is very "California" (at least to us non-natives who have spent meaningful time there). Bonus: the Wolfman scene.

---

J.C. in Thủ Dầu Một, Bình Dương, Vietnam: L.A. Story.

Because it truly captures the spirit of L.A. We actually do think the weather is always the same (though it's not). We actually do have lives and philosophy built around the freeways. And we actually do continue with whatever we are doing during any mild earthquake (5 or less)—and then take bets on the Richter Scale afterward.

---

C.Z. in Sacramento, CA: Phenomenon, and not just because it was filmed in Northern California—Auburn, CA, to be precise. It has a beautiful message.

---

S.B. in Hood River, OR: I am sure a number of great films will be offered, but I am going to nominate The Lost Boys. It takes place in the fictional town of Santa Carla (actually filmed in Santa Cruz). It uses the locations, especially the Santa Cruz boardwalk, to great effect. It is one of the very few movies that I have watched over and over again. It is arguably one of the greatest vampire movies ever made (and does feature in many of the published lists). It established the genre of teenage vampires (unfortunately to be mangled by Twilight), and maybe the best reason of all, it has one of the greatest soundtracks of all time, with songs like "I Still Believe," "Cry Little Sister," and an excellent cover of "People Are Strange."

A great pity that a proper sequel with Kiefer Sutherland was never filmed.

---

D.S. in Layton, UT: This film did not win any awards, or appear on any top ten lists but Back To the Beach with Frankie Avalon and Annette Funicello is the go to movie of Lady DS of Layton, UT and I when we just need silly fun nonsense. It is a reunion of the old beach party gang from the early '60s about 40 years later. Frankie and Annette are now a conservative couple living in Ohio and decide to surprise their daughter (real life hardened criminal) Lori Loughlin, who is (unbeknownst to them) living in sin with her boyfriend on the beach. Hijinks ensue with cameos from the Gilligan's Island and Leave It To Beaver gangs with Dick Dale and Stevie Ray Vaughn providing some killer guitar music.

Sounds ridiculous, and it is. But so much fun.

---

C.J. in Redondo Beach, CA: I've noticed (Z) and I differ fairly widely in our film opinions. Back to the Future probably wouldn't enter my top 25 films set in California (as fun a film as it is!).

You eluded to Chinatown in your request for responses... and that is indeed a fantastic choice that I considered. However, I'd go with Vertigo. San Francisco and Mission San Juan Bautista both feature prominently in Hitchcock's masterpiece.

I saw this the first time when I was about nine or ten. If I recall that summer, one of the local cable stations was running a two week Hitchcock series—one classic film of his every night. It's really how I was introduced to the master of suspense. At that time, Vertigo was in the process of being re-discovered. For years it was considered more of an interesting failure than classic Hitchcock like a Psycho or Birds or Rear Window. Then, in the early- to mid-80's, they remastered its print, and re-released it to theaters. I didn't see it right then, but maybe a couple of years later when it circled back to TV.

Anyhow, I remember watching Vertigo with my father, and it haunted me for DAYS. I nearly couldn't sleep that first night. Oddly, for the master of suspense, it's probably one of Hitch's LEAST suspenseful films. About 60% sort of plays out in a typical Hitchcockian sorta way, albeit with a supernatural bent. But then he pulls the rug from you and it becomes a film about obsession, as well as trying to change our mates into visions of our ideal fantasies. I didn't quite get all of that as a kid, but I knew intuitively it was going in some weirdly dark areas. Then that ending where Jimmy Stewart has to relive losing his love again... shattering. Maybe the first film I ever saw where the protagonist doesn't win at the end. Not only doesn't he win, he basically loses EVERYTHING he cares about.

Now it's widely thought of as Hitchcock's best film (at least in critical circles), so I sorta feel like my prepubescent self was ahead of the curve.

---

J.G. in Farmington, CT: Why did you do this to me? I love movies, a bunch of the movies I love are set in California, and now I have to pick only one or a few? Dude!

Well, despite the obvious front runners 2 Fast 2 Furious and Beverly Hills Chihuahua, we have a lot to pick from: A quick search reveals the wiki page "List of films set in California" with 894 entries, but many of these are only partially set in California. I think this discussion should be restricted to those films entirely set in California, like the subject line implies (Chinatown) and be uniquely Californian in subject matter, like about showbiz or tech or L.A. crime.

Therefore, I contend:

1. Heat tied with Collateral. I love, love, love Michael Mann. Both shot entirely on location, mostly at night, in places where people live and work: homes, restaurants, truck stops, hospitals, streets, docks, downtown, bars, nightclubs, seedy motels, LA Metro trains, defunct drive-ins... nary an interrogation room to be found. The city itself is a character, and he uses it.
   
   
2. Who Framed Roger Rabbit. While there's a case to be made that the underlying issue (the GM Streetcar Conspiracy) wasn't real—and I, a foamer railfan liberal, am happy to debate that with anyone—the sheer inventiveness of this film, its original story, iconic characters, screwball humor, and timeless visuals have aged incredibly well. Also, Christopher Lloyd's transformation at the end was absolute nightmare fuel for children, a transgressive and risky posture for film that hasn't been seen recently.

Honorable mentions: La La Land, L.A. Confidential.

---

A.G. in Scranton, PA: It's so damnably cliche for a bank robber to offer Heat, and I'm not even a big fan of the film, but most American males and a good number of women would say it is an incredible movie, one entirely set in California... ugh, so I'm gonna offer it because people are stupid.

Take it from me: Nope. Not how crime works. I'm more of an expert on crimes my name isn't attached to than the "sexy" one it is, and nope, nope, nopity, nope. Just nope.

Bank robbery crews are shockingly rare because most of the successful sorts of bank robbers know not to trust anyone with that information or in such a situation. The few crews they do apprehend always end up being white Christian nationalists or rogue police officers, you know, the heroes in blue with the tin badge of small di**age.

"Law abiding" citizens like thinking crime and policing and things work like that, but they just don't. It's movie crime, movie police work, the sorts digestible by citizens, the sorts that keep them buying tickets and clicking on them on Hulu, Netflix, and the 28 million other streaming services there are these days.

The gunfight everyone is so sexually aroused by is meh. I've been in worse... and, you know what? Just forget it. It was designed to cause as many male loads as bullets to be shot in the theaters they showed it in. 99% of people would piss themselves if anyone who wasn't some local hunter or a MAGA asshat even popped off a round near their culture de sacs.

The robbery at the beginning was interesting, the one at the end a joke. The movie was tedious, filled with underwhelming performances from greats such as Al Pacino, Robert De Niro, and Val Kilmer. The "tension" between Pacino and De Niro when the foes meet one another at a sit-down in a diner was non-existent...

At the suggestion of P.M. in Port Angeles, we are going to try something new. Based on the responses we got, we narrowed it down to a list of 32 "finalists" (including some that are not mentioned above). If readers want to vote for (up to) their top five, the ballot is here. We will reveal the results next week.

Also, here is the question for next week:

M.B.F. in Oakton, VA, asks: What is the best film on American politics, and why?

Submit your answers to comments@electoral-vote.com, preferably with subject line "Capraesque"!

---

The reason Tennessee protects personality rights is because it was home to Elvis Presley, whose name and image are the most valuable in the world, and are a source of a fair bit of tax revenue for the state.

---

If you wish to contact us, please use one of these addresses. For the first two, please include your initials and city.

• questions@electoral-vote.com    For questions about politics, civics, history, etc. to be answered on a Saturday
• comments@electoral-vote.com   For "letters to the editor" for possible publication on a Sunday
• corrections@electoral-vote.com To tell us about typos or factual errors we should fix
• items@electoral-vote.com            For general suggestions, ideas, etc.

To download a poster about the site to hang up, please click here.

---

Email a link to a friend.

---The Votemaster and Zenger