Top Film List 2018

Lists of top films will often appear in newspapers and online at this time of the year. My wife and I are avid film fans but rarely go to the movies anymore. We prefer to stay home and watch DVDs from Netflix or my own collection. I prefer to use a DVD rather than scanning because the DVD often comes with commentary and special features that can be interesting. Below find a list of films that we have enjoyed in the past year. I begin with eight foreign films.

Marcello Mastroianni, Divorce Italian style

Divorce Italian Style: Director Pietro Germi’s hilarious and cutting 1962 satire of Sicilian mores and culture is one of the great Italian comedies. Marcello Mastroianni plays a Sicilian aristocrat who longs to marry his nubile young cousin Angela. One obstacle stands in his way: his fatuous and fawning wife. His solution? Since divorce is illegal, he hatches a plot to lure his spouse into the arms of another and then murder her in a justifiable effort to save his honor. 

Italian for Beginners: A warm and playful story from Denmark about six perfect strangers and the shared journey of discovery that changes each of their lives. In a small Danish city, a mismatched collection of opposites have signed up for an Italian class in hope of spicing up their lives. The film was shot in “cinema verite” style without any special effects or overbearing sound track. 2002.

Arranged: An American film from 2007 about the clash of seemingly foreign cultures in contemporary Brooklyn. “Arranged” centers on two young women-- one an Orthodox Jew, the other a devout Muslim-- who learn that they share much in common, especially since both their families are arranging marriages for them.

Rabbit Proof Fence: A powerful true story of hope and determination from Australia. At a time when it was Australian government policy to train aboriginal girls as domestic workers, young Molly Craig leads her little sister and cousin in an escape from an internment camp. To get home they must travel on foot along the 1500 mile rabbit-proof fence that bisects the continent.

The Band‘s Visit: In this charming 2007 film from Israel, an Egyptian police band arrives in Israel to play at the Arab Cultural Center. When they take the wrong bus, the band members find themselves in a desolate Israeli village. With no other option than to spend the night with the local townspeople, the two distinctly different cultures realize the universal bonds of love, music, and life. This film has currently been adapted as a hit Broadway musical.

Se Dio Vuole ( God Willing): A 2015 Italian comedy about a dysfunctional modern Italian family. The father is an arrogant cardiac surgeon who has literally driven his wife to drink. The family is shocked and dismayed when their son announces that he wants to quit medical school to become a priest. The father, a virulent atheist, sets out to prove that the young man’s charismatic mentor is a fake.

Early Summer: A charming film about ordinary life in post war Japan. The Mamiya family is seeking a husband for their daughter Noriko. This seemingly simple story is one of famed director, Yasujiro Ozu’s most complex films.—a nuanced examination of life’s changes over three generations. Shot beautifully in black and white, this 1951 classic stars Setsuko Hara, one of filmdoms greatest actresses.

Umbrellas of Cherbourg: This French musical is one of the most beloved romantic movies of all time. Every word of dialogue is sung in director Jacques Demy’s masterpiece starring the beautiful Catherine Deneuve as a shop assistant madly in love with a gas station mechanic. Their ill-fated love story unfolds to Academy Award winner Michel Legrand’s enchanting score. Restored to its original pristine glory, The Umbrellas of Cherbourg won the grand prize at the 1964 Cannes film festival, and was nominated for five Oscars.

Catherine Deneuve and Nino Castelnuove

This year, in addition to the foreign films, I include some American “film noir” classics from the 1940s and 50s. These black and white thrillers have stood the test of time and can be viewed over and over again. Sometimes they were "B" movies on a double bill but now many are regarded as true works of art. Moreover, for seniors like myself they provide a glimpse of the world when we were young.

High Sierra: A ground-breaking 1941 film starring Humphrey Bogart and Ida Lupino. Bogart plays a prohibition era gangster released from prison only to find himself out of place in a new world. Written by John Huston, and directed with gritty intensity by Raoul Walsh, High Sierra signaled a new era in film.

The Set-up: A 1949 boxing drama starring Robert Ryan and Audrey Totter. Ryan is at his best as an aging fighter at the end of his career, and Totter plays his steadfast wife. Famed director Robert Wise presents a real-time look at the stale-air boxing venue, the bloodthirsty fans, the ring savagery, and the delusional dreams of the boxing world.

The Narrow Margin: A classic train thriller with Charles McGraw and Marie Windsor, the dark lady of film noir. McGraw plays a cop guarding a gangster’s moll (Windsor) as they travel to L.A. to testify before a grand jury. Also on the train are determined hitmen who know the moll is on the train but don’t know what she looks like.

The Killing: Sterling Hayden stars with Marie Windsor in this 1956 heist drama directed by young Stanley Kubrick. “The Killing” is tough, taut, tense, and one of the greatest crime thrillers ever made.

Roadhouse. In this 1948 film a sultry singer upsets the friendship of two men with tragic results. Starring Ida Lupino, Cornell Wilde, and Richard Widmark, one of the premier noir villains.

Too Late for Tears: Lizabeth Scott and Dan Duryea star in this 1949 tale of a beautiful, scheming housewife who will let nothing stand in her way after a fortune drops into her lap.

Dark Passage: This 1947 film about a man who changes his identify is perhaps the least well-known of the films that starred Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall. It ranks with their best. My favorite scene is the one where an underworld doctor performs plastic surgery on a fugitive in a shabby office in the middle of the night, and makes him look just like Humphrey Bogart.

Impact: Brian Donlevy and Ella Raines star in this 1949 film about a successful San Francisco businessman whose wife and her lover scheme to bump off. The film also features famed Chinese-American actress Anna May Wong.

Boomerang: Director Elia Kazan won critical acclaim for this vividly portrayed true-crime drama set in Stamford CT in 1947. Dana Andrews stars as a District Attorney out to bring the suspected murderer of a beloved priest to justice.

In a Lonely Place. In this 1950 film Humphrey Bogart gives one of his best performances as a veteran screenwriter whose career is at a dead end. Unfortunately, after a chance meeting with a young hat-check girl he becomes a prime suspect when the girl is found murdered. Film Noir favorite Gloria Grahame co-stars.

Witness to Murder: Barbara Stanwyck stars in this 1954 film noir as a woman fighting to convince police that one sleepless night she saw a young woman being strangled in an apartment across the street. When a body cannot be found, the police suspect that she has either been dreaming or out of her mind. George Sanders and Gary Merrill co-star.

The Burglar: This little known 1957 crime thriller with typical noir twists and turns stars Dan Duryea as a cunning jewel thief hoping to pull off his final heist. Jayne Mansfield plays one of the accomplices in a surprisingly good early role.

I Wake Up Screaming: In a rare dramatic role Betty Grable plays the sister of a beautiful murdered model in this tense 1941 thriller. While police search for the murderer, Grable is falling in love with the prime suspect played by Victor Mature. The many plot twists and turns leave viewers guessing right to the end.

Lady from Shanghai: Orson Welles directed and starred in this spellbinding 1948 film that also stars beautiful femme fatale Rita Hayworth. Hired to work on a yacht belonging to Hayworth's crippled and sinister lawyer husband, Welles is drawn into a web of intrigue and murder. The climax is one of the greatest scenes in film history.

Nightfall. Aldo Ray and a young Anne Bancroft star in this little known 1957 film noir about a young man innocently trapped in a web of crime and murder. The film features some of the best work of two film noir masters: director Jacques Tourneur, and Burnett Guffey, the cinematographer whose dark city scenes and winter landscapes are classic noir.

The Asphalt Jungle: John Huston directed this 1950 classic noir heist drama that has often been copied but never equaled. Sterling Hayden, Sam Jaffe, and Louis Calhern star as the principals in a plot to steal a fortune in jewels. The film also features Marilyn Monroe in the role that launched her into stardom.

###

Marilyn Monroe in The Asphalt Jungle

###

The Christmas Tree

For the first time since my wife and I were married over 55 years ago, we are thinking of not having a real Christmas tree this year. We do consider ourselves blest to have each other and still be in relatively good health after all these years. But our six children have left the house and have their own families, and I'm not sure how many of our 16 grandchildren will visit us this Christmas season. One of them will even be in Tahiti with his mom and dad on a destination holiday. I'm not sure we will even be able to see our first great-grandchild who will only be three months old.

As we have gotten older, our trees have gotten smaller and smaller, and the gifts around its base sparser and sparser. But I've been reading some of my past Christmas posts and found this one from 2015 that might make us change our minds. Best wishes to all for a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

The Christmas tree remains one of the most popular symbols of the Christmas season. Whether a simple tree in our home or the most magnificently decorated tree in a public place like Rockefeller Center the tree bears the same meaning.

In a wonderful book on so-called children's stories entitled "The Owl, the Raven, and the Dove",  G. Ronald Murphy S.J. explained the origins and meaning of the tree and its decorations. 

The evergreen tree has found its most lasting and most emotional place in our culture, without a doubt, in the Christmas tree, an amalgam of Germanic legend and the Cross. In December of every year the tree comes into the house. A tree inside the home after all the centuries that have passed is quite miracle enough. To glorify and celebrate its ancient, compassionate magic power, it is decorated with lights (with burning candles in Germany!) and with tinsel, to make sure it looks radiantly stolid and happy despite the cold and ice. Then a star is placed at its peak, since Wise Men must surely find their way to this tree. Below the tree, as if he had just emerged from its trunk, the true source of the warmth of the Tree of the Universe and its power to renew life, encouragement, and protection against all the kinds of cold, is lying in a manger: the newborn child. 

                         O Tannenbaum, O Tannenbaum,
                        how faithful are your leaves.
                        you are ever green, not only during the summer,
                        but even during the winter when the snow falls.
                        O Tannenbaum, O tannenbaum,
                        how faithful are your leaves.

Click here for a brief video of the song that contains a clip from Joyeux Noel, a French film about the well-known Christmas battlefield truce in the first year of WWI. Or view the video below.

The Greatest Gift

Frank Capra, the legendary pioneer Hollywood film director, claimed that his best film was "It's a Wonderful Life," now a perennial Christmas classic 72 years after its debut at Christmas time in 1946. The film was based on a short story, entitled "The Greatest Gift" written by Philip Van Doren Stern. It is a charming and moving story that can be read in less than an hour. It is still available in a little book that includes an afterword by Stern's daughter as well as beautiful specially commissioned artwork.

Capra claimed that the story was the one he had been looking for all of his life. After reading the story it is amazing to see how Capra used the core of the story to create a great masterpiece. Credit must go to Capra, his production crew and the marvelous cast he assembled to fill out and complete the story. It should be required study in any film course.

Although “It’s a Wonderful Life” has become one of the most popular films of all time, film critics seem obligated to dismiss it as an exercise in sentimentality. They overlook the fact that most “sentimental” films of that or any era are almost impossible to watch today. Critics rarely discuss the film on its merits as a film and tend to overlook Capra’s mastery of the film medium.

Even the most hard hearted critic will be hard pressed to keep the tears from flowing especially at the finale. Why can’t critics recognize that it’s not just sentimentality? It takes a real craftsman to elicit such a universal response? Not only did Capra regard this film as the greatest work of his illustrious career, but so too did its famous star, Jimmy Stewart.

Both Capra and Stewart had returned to Hollywood right after the end of World War II after distinguished service in the military. Stewart had piloted many bombing missions, and Capra had been responsible for making the famous “Why We Fight “ documentaries for the Army. “It’s a Wonderful Life” was the first film venture for each of them on their return to civilian life.

It is well known that before the war Frank Capra had become Hollywood’s most famous and acclaimed director despite the fact that he had come to America as a young Sicilian boy who could not speak a word of English. His family migrated to California to provide for themselves by farming. The young Frank worked to help the family but somehow managed to become the only one in the family to get a college degree. 

After a brief and uneventful stint in the Army in the waning days of World War I, he found himself out of work and with no prospects. In his autobiography he described how quite by accident he stumbled into a fledgling movie studio and began his career. He was in Hollywood almost at the inception and proceeded to learn the craft of filmmaking from the ground up.

All the things he learned during this apprenticeship are evident in “It’s a Wonderful Life.” In the first place, he learned to make pictures that were really moving. His characters never just stand around just talking. Either they are moving or the camera is moving. Unlike many other films, Capra’s never grind to a standstill.

Just visualize the scene right after the marriage of George and Mary.  Ernie, the cab driver, is driving them to the train station as they embark on their honeymoon. They are joking with Ernie but  through the back window the camera shows men running in the street. We jump immediately into the scene of the run on the banks without any pause or introduction.

Speaking of George and Mary their earlier love scene where they both talk on the same telephone is perhaps the best and most famous in all of film history. No love scene in Casablanca, an equally sentimental film but a favorite of critics, can compare to this one for realism and emotion.

Capra was a pioneer practitioner of many of the techniques that we take for granted in films today. He began the film with a flashback and narrator. He used stop action to introduce the adult George Bailey. No film noir director ever used light and dark to greater effect than Capra. At the film’s finale the entire cast is  artfully brought back as if to take their bows. The camera goes from face to face in one of the most moving scenes ever shot.

“The Best Years of Our Lives,” a saga of returning war veterans, swept the Academy Awards in 1946 but it was a real travesty when Frederic March won the Best Actor award for his relatively wooden portrayal of a hard drinking banker. He wasn’t even the best actor in “Best Years.” In addition to the classic telephone love scene, I remember especially Stewart’s reaction to the news that his college-hero brother will not be returning to take over the running of the Bailey Building and Loan. In that brief scene his face goes through a whole gamut of emotions. That scene prepared us for the angry Stewart who berates his own children on Christmas Eve. Jimmy Stewart really grew up in this film.

The rest of the cast could have won an award for best ensemble. Capra had a knack of bringing out the best in his reservoir of great character actors. Was Donna Reed ever better? Capra introduced a young Gloria Grahame into this film and she was a stunning success. Who can ever forget her reaction to Stewart’s compliment on her dress? “Oh, this old thing. I only wear this when I don’t care how I look!" Of the others it will just be sufficient to notice Beulah Bondi’s transformation from a loving mother to a haggard old landlady.

Every scene in this great film was planned and directed by Frank Capra. It is a true work of art. Who can bear to watch any of the remakes? It takes great skill to make a “sentimental” film watchable and believable. 

Years ago I remember an episode of “Cheers” where the regulars were standing around the bar on Christmas Eve watching “It’s a Wonderful Life.” At that time no one owned the rights to the film and so it could be seen on practically every local channel all during the day and night. Characteristically, they were casting sarcastic jokes. At the end of the film they were all crying uncontrollably.

###

Life Expectancy: Hope and Despair

                                         

Last week the Wall Street Journal headlined a report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that claimed a slight decline in life expectancy in the USA in 2017 from the previous year. On average someone like my first great-grandchild, who was born about two months ago, can expect to live for 78 years and six months, a loss of about a month from the previous year. 

For most of my 79 years the average life expectancy has been gradually trending upwards, a result primarily of the tremendous developments in medicine that have taken place since the end of the Second World War. Average Life Expectancy is just an average, and does not indicate how long any individual will live. In times and places where the average life expectancy was very low, it was usually because of high infant mortality rates. Historians guess that in the Middle Ages average life expectancy was only about 35 years. Many would live well beyond 35, but the average was kept down by the heavy death toll among new-borns and other infants. 

The CDC did not attribute the slight drop in the trend of rising mortality rates to problems in the USA’s health care system. The report claimed that rising suicide rates, “the sharpest annual increase in suicides in nearly a decade,” and “a continued rise in deaths from powerful opioid drugs like fentanyl” were the main drivers of premature deaths especially among the young and middle-aged.

The Wall Street Journal also included a chart that showed that the death rate among black men was substantially higher than that for white men. Suicide and opioids might have been a factor but other studies have shown that the high murder rate of young black men involved in urban drug gangs is also a contributing factor. Chicago, for example, is notorious for an extremely high black on black murder rate.

Surprisingly, the death rate among Hispanic men was substantially lower than that for white men. Even more surprising was the fact that Hispanic women had an even lower death rate than white or black women. I say surprisingly because Hispanics obviously do not have greater access to health care than whites or blacks. Moreover, their economic status is certainly not better than whites or blacks.

Although it was not apparently mentioned in the CDC report, I suspect that the traditional family structure and religious background of the average American of Hispanic descent is a major factor in their life expectancy. These traditions will probably change as Hispanic children and grandchildren become assimilated into modern American society, but for the time being, they seem to be working to prevent the anxiety, worry, and loneliness that lead to suicide and drug use.

Last weekend my wife and I took the commuter train to New York city for the day. We had lunch at a nice restaurant near Grand Central station and then walked up to St. Patrick’s cathedral on New York’s famous Fifth Avenue. The streets were crowded with holiday tourists and shoppers, especially in front of the decorated windows of Saks Fifth Avenue. As usual the Cathedral itself was packed with tourists walking up and down the aisles.

 As so often happens in NYC, we came upon an unexpected surprise. Standing around the main altar was a large chorus of Filipino young men and women singing songs associated with their country’s traditional celebration of the upcoming season of Advent, the four weeks preceding Christmas in the Catholic church calendar. The girls and women wore colorful gowns of white and red and the boys and men were also in white. The colors matched the joy of the expressions on their faces and the songs they sang.

I know that this observation is based on anecdotal evidence but I believe that as more and more of our young people turn their backs on traditional morality and beliefs, we will continue to see an increasing rate of suicides and drug abuse in this country. Someone once said that when people cease to believe in God, they will believe in anything. That is true, but it is also true that many wind up believing in nothing. 

Isn't it odd that the word "advent" is contained in the word, "adventure"? Advent is not just a time of preparation for Christmas, it is a time for Christians to consider how far they have progressed on the great adventure of life. The Catholic Church did not invent the great virtues of Faith, Hope, and Charity. Christians believe that these virtues are gifts of God. When people have nothing to believe in or hope for, why go on living?

###

Thanksgiving Proclamation

Below I reproduce George Washington's "Thanksgiving Proclamation" of 1789. Washington had just been elected first President of the newly formed United States of America following upon the adoption of the new Constitution by the States. *

I have read much about Washington and everything I have read indicates that he was a great man and a great American. He was regarded by his contemporaries in Europe as the greatest man of his age. His proclamation is a sign of his greatness.

Thanksgiving Proclamation
Issued by President George Washington, at the request of Congress, on October 3, 1789

By the President of the United States of America, a Proclamation.
Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor; and—Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me “to recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness:”

Now, therefore, I do recommend and assign Thursday, the 26th day of November next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the signal and manifold mercies and the favor, able interpositions of His providence in the course and conclusion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquillity, union, and plenty which we have since enjoyed; for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enabled to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national one now lately instituted; for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and, in general, for all the great and various favors which He has been pleased to confer upon us.

And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations, and beseech Him to pardon our national and other trangressions; to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a blessing to all the people by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all sovereigns and nations (especially such as have shown kindness to us), and to bless them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among them and us; and, generally, to grant unto all mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as He alone knows to be best.

Given under my hand at the City of New York the third day of October in the year of our Lord 1789.
Go. Washington

* Washington's proclamation did not make Thanksgiving an annual National holiday. That would only come with Abraham Lincoln after the terrible Civil War.

### 

Connecticut Election Post Mortem

 

Republican Bob Stefanowski’s campaign for Governor of Connecticut followed the same path that led other millionaire candidates like Linda McMahon and Tom Foley to flop on election day. Even though he garnered more votes than Foley, he lost the election because he could not overcome large Democrat majorities in cities like Bridgeport, Hartford, and New Haven in this year of record turnout.

Stefanowski’s campaign ignored the urban vote in the hope of overcoming it with majorities in suburban and rural areas. However, his proposal to eliminate or phase out the state income tax did not help him win many votes among suburbanites who believed that it was either impractical, or that it would only add to already high property taxes. Obviously, phasing out the income tax did not gain many votes in the inner cities whose residents, including college students, are largely exempt. 

Stefanowski could not even carry suburban Fairfield, a town of 75000 that he lost by a wider margin than the statewide percentage. As a Fairfield resident I was surprised that the Republican candidate did not even bother to campaign here. There were no visits or rallies and few lawn signs. There was no constant stream of mailing pieces. It appeared as if he had just written off not just Fairfield but all of prosperous Fairfield county.

In a recent op-ed in the Connecticut Post Tim Herbst, a Trumbull politician who was defeated by Stefanowski in the Republican primary, faulted Stefanowski and the Republicans for failing to muster a ground game to match the Democrat record setting numbers.


There was truth in Herbst’s assessment but no one was more responsible for the Republican defeat than Herbst himself. His refusal to accept the convention's nominee, and his decision to enter the primary did much to allow an inexperienced, wealthy outsider like Stefanowski to win the primary with only a small percentage of the vote.

If Herbst had thrown his support to Danbury mayor Mark Boughton, the convention's nominee, Boughton would likely have defeated Stefanowski in the primary. Even though Stefanowski garnered a record number of votes in the election, I believe that Boughton would have done better. He was an experienced Connecticut politician who would have gained more support from Republican leaders who still play a pivotal role in getting out the vote. He would probably have kept Danbury from favoring Lamont, and the full and active support of Herbst would certainly have helped in the Fairfield county suburbs

Stefanowski is a millionaire businessman, and he couldn’t help looking like a millionaire businessman even if he insisted on calling himself Bob. His desire to bring sound business practices to state government fell largely on deaf ears, especially since he failed to demonstrate how such reforms would benefit the average citizen.

No matter how sound your ideas may be, you must win the election to have any chance of implementing them. What’s the good of having good ideas, if you never get a chance to implement. Stefanowski’s Democrat opponent, the far-wealthier Ned Lamont from Greenwich, the wealthiest town in the state, does not look like a businessman. His strategy was to appeal to the Democrat base made up of public service unions, depressed cities, and suburban women upset about the supposed threat to women’s rights posed by the likes of Trump and Judge Kavanaugh. 

It's true that Stefanowski supported Trump but he had none of the President's charisma, moxie, and name recognition, essential equalities for a political outsider to win without the support of party regulars. This election should be a lesson to Republicans all over the country. Democrat Lamont was also uninspiring but he had a united party behind him.

###

Immigration and Compassion

                                       

The caravan of refugees and asylum seekers slowly winding its way through Mexico toward the United States has brought the immigration question to the forefront in the weeks preceding today’s mid-term elections. President Trump has seized upon the issue in his numerous campaign rallies and not only highlighted the need to keep borders secure, but also, has sent troops to the border to assist immigration officials.

On their part, Democrats have been adopting the position of their left-wing Progressive elements to oppose the President’s “nativist”, anti-immigration position. They are calling for “open” borders, unrestricted immigration, and the abolition of the Immigration Control Agency (ICE).  Democrats claim that they are the party of compassion, while their opponents, motivated as they are by racism and white supremacy, are totally lacking in compassion. 

Frankly, I fail to see compassion in those who exhort and encourage poor people from Central America to embark on a dangerous 1000-mile journey with their children in tow. It is dangerous enough for Mexicans to walk through their own country. I also suspect that these immigrants are being encouraged for motives that have little to do with their welfare. Consider how many Democrat candidates and their supporters in the media have been using the immigrants as a weapon in the campaigns. 

It is true that the President has used the immigrant issue to rally his supporters but I believe that when he asked the people in the caravans to turn around and go home, he was actually showing more compassion than his critics. Just today an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal described the crowding and confusion even at legal entry sites, as well as the diseases picked up by immigrants on the journey.

Actually, I think the President could have gone even further. He could have offered to fly immigrants and their families directly into the USA. All they would need is a sponsor who would agree to care for them and provide for their basic needs for a period of years. I would like to suggest that compassionate liberals, especially the very well-to-do ones living in wealthy blue states, take it upon themselves to adopt or take in families of immigrants. 

I am sure that compassionate liberals would jump at the opportunity to take care of the needy. People like Oprah Winfrey could certainly take in one than one family. Wealthy politicians like Dianne Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, and Connecticut millionaire politicians like Richard Blumenthal and Rosa DeLauro would also jump at the opportunity. They could even send the immigrant children to the private schools their own children attended. 

The President could even offer to fly the immigrants to sanctuary cities like San Francisco, New York, and New Haven in Connecticut. It would be less expensive than sending troops to the border, and take some of the pressure off the border states. There are certainly enough compassionate people in these ultra blue cities to take in, and care for caravans of immigrants. In New Haven, for example, the Yale Law school students who were able to take time off to travel to Washington to protest against the nomination of Judge Kavanaugh would certainly be willing to help.

I’m making the above suggestion with tongue in cheek but the more I think about it, the more I believe such a plan has roots in American history. When my grandparents came to the USA more than 100 years ago, the doors were open to immigrants, but there were some restrictions. Those with diseases were sent back at the expense of the shipping company that transported them over.

More importantly, on arrival, someone had to meet them and be willing to provide them with room and board as well as a job. Usually, it would be family members but sometimes potential employers had to provide jobs and housing for the immigrants.  It was not the role of government. There were problems, of course, but history shows that this private, voluntary system was a huge success.

Even before during the colonial period the system of indentured servitude worked very well in bringing needed immigrants into the country and assimilating them. Immigrants would sign an agreement or indenture whereby they would work for someone for seven years. In effect, they were servants whose basic needs would be supplied by their employer. They were not slaves since they were free to move on after the indenture period was over.

There is no doubt in my mind that we need immigrants today. Even with all the legal and illegal immigrants that have entered over the past few decades, we still have virtually full employment. There are many jobs that Americans can’t or won’t take. Just the other day, the man who repaired the chimney on my house was from Honduras. His employer is the grandson of an Italian immigrant who came to the USA about the same time as my grandparents. 

America is one of the few countries in the world that has an immigration problem. Most other countries have an emigration problem since their people are so willing to leave. If we work together, I believe that we could solve the problem but I don’t think it does any good to claim that those who disagree with your solution are lacking in compassion.

###

Unfunded State Pension Liabilities

States all over the country are grappling with ever increasing unfunded pension liabilities. My home state of Connecticut trails such pension liability behemoths like Illinois and New Jersey but still ranks high on the danger list. In June 2010 the Connecticut public pension fund had $9.3 Billion in assets but its actuaries calculated that the State still needed an additional $21.1 Billion to meet all its pension obligations. It was only 44% funded.

By June 2016, six years later, State pension assets grew to $11.9 Billion, a 28% increase, largely because of the increase in the stock market. Nevertheless, despite Governor Malloy’s tax increases and commitment to funding pensions, the pension liability had grown to $32.3 Billion, a whopping 53% increase. After six years under Governor Malloy, the pension system was only 37% funded. What caused the increase? 

The Governor, who will not seek re-election this year after serving two terms, has placed the blame for rising pension liabilities on his predecessors in office, as well as on the Legislature which has been controlled by fellow Democrats throughout his tenure. His complaint is a common one. If only previous politicians had had the guts to face up to reality and popular pressure, pension liabilities would be manageable. Instead, politicians just pushed the day of reckoning down the road.  

There is a degree of truth in Malloy’s assessment but actually there was no way that any of these state public pension plans could ever have been adequately or fully funded. They are “defined benefit” plans that require actuaries to determine the potential costs of benefits that are promised to future beneficiaries. A key factor in the calculations will be the “assumed rate of return” on both assets in the plan. 

Despite the increase in Connecticut pension assets during Governor Malloy’s tenure, the pension liability has grown largely because of the low interest rate environment during those years. If the expected rate of return is reduced, actuaries must indicate that pension liability is growing. A drop of even one percentage point in the assumed rate of return will add millions to pension liability.

Politicians have no control over interest rates. Lack of control is one of the reasons why most business corporations dropped their defined benefit pension plans over the past few decades. A business could be thriving but its pension actuary could kill its balance sheet by claiming that it had to put billions more into the pension plan because of a decline in expected rate of return due to circumstances entirely beyond control. In a defined contribution or 401k type plan, a corporation’s contribution is a manageable percentage of payroll.

The very definition of the benefit in a defined benefit pension plan presents another problem for actuaries trying to assess pension funding. The retirement benefit is usually a percentage of an employee’s final average pay over the highest three years of service. How is it possible to calculate pension liability when salaries can change dramatically especially during the last years of employment? For example, during his tenure Governor Malloy has appointed a number of Democrat legislators to high paying positions in his administration or on the judicial bench. 

While those politicians served in the legislature, actuaries would determine their pension liability as a percentage of their $35000 part-time salary. But they need to serve only three years in their new positions to throw all pension calculations out the window. Instead of getting 60% or 70% of $35000, the actuaries will have to figure that they will receive the same percentage of some six figure salary. During his tenure the governor raised his long-time Stamford Democrat friend Andrew McDonald to a judgeship on the State Supreme Court. McDonald’s minimal contributions to the pension fund during his eight years in the legislature will come nowhere near providing a six-figure pension.

These political appointments are the tip of the iceberg. How is it possible to calculate the future pension liability for young teachers just starting their careers when no one knows what their final average pay will be? Step raises due to longevity, minimal cost of living increases, and future inflation will practically quadruple their salaries after 35 years of service. 

Businesses changed their pension plans years ago because they lived in a very competitive environment, and they could not count on taxpayers to bail them out. States and municipalities were not in the same situation. Not only did public entities not worry about profits and losses, politicians had little incentive to strike hard bargains with public service unions. In business, management and labor sit across the negotiating table from one another. In government, the politicians negotiating with the unions are usually on the same side of the table. Not only do governors and legislators rely heavily on union votes and campaign contributions, but also they, their families, and friends often gain from benefits they grant to union members. 

Why didn’t Governor Malloy change the pension system for non-union employees in his administration or in the state court system? They have no binding union contracts. In the last eight years he and the Democrat controlled legislature could have put them into a 401k type plan with the stroke of a pen. Alternatively, he could have easily changed the definition in the benefit formula for these non-union employees. Instead of basing their pension on the average of their highest three years of service, the Governor could have used the average of all the years of their public service. 

Public service employees make up a small percentage of the population of Connecticut but a larger and larger share of the State’s budget is going to fund their generous pensions. The rest of Connecticut's population is covered under Social Security where  the retirement benefit is based not on the highest three years pay but on average pay over practically an entire working career.

 ###

Connecticut Governor's Race

 

Republican Bob Stefanowsk 

It looks like Republican Bob Stefanowski is not doing well in his quest to become Governor of Connecticut. After eight years of the disastrous administration of Democrat Governor Dannell Malloy, 2018 looked like the year when Republicans could not only win the Governorship, but also gain at least one of the legislative houses.

But Stefanowski’s campaign seems to be following the same path that led other millionaire candidates like Linda McMahon and Tom Foley to flop on election day. Each of them lost close elections because they could not overcome massive Democrat majorities in cities like Bridgeport, Hartford, and New Haven.

Stefanowski’s campaign seems to be conceding the urban vote in the hope of overcoming it with slight majorities in suburban and rural areas. His plan to eliminate or phase out the state income tax will not get him votes in the inner cities whose residents, including college students, are largely exempt. It won’t even help him win many votes among suburbanites who believe that it is either impractical, or that it will only add to already high property taxes. 

Stefanowski would be much better off in calling for a reduction in the state sales tax, a regressive tax that effects everyone in the state, even those in the inner cities. It is a regressive tax in that the poor pay the same rate as the rich. The tax is the same on diapers as it is on luxury items. I also suspect that a reduction in the sales tax would have great appeal among senior citizens. 

If you check out Stefanowski’s website, you will find a sound economic idea like eliminating business taxes is presented as if it would only benefit businesses.  He fails to point out that business taxes are really paid by those who buy the products and services provided by business. A business must inevitably pass on taxes and administrative costs to consumers or else it must go out of business. 

Stefanowski is a millionaire businessman, and he can’t help looking like a millionaire businessman even if he insists on calling himself Bob. But his campaign should not have been about business, or even about bringing business principles to government. It should have been about fairness for all the people of Connecticut. 

He could have gone to Bridgeport, Hartford, and New Haven and asked people if they had pensions that would guarantee them 70% of their highest salary after working only 35 years. He could have asked them if they even had pensions or benefits at all comparable to those enjoyed by state union employees. He could have asked Seniors if their Social Security checks came anywhere near the retirement benefits of public service workers.

Stefanowski could even have taken a more popular position on tolls and proposed just placing them on I95 at the Greenwich and Rhode Island entrances in the same way as New Hampshire and Delaware. In addition to raising money for needed infrastructure repair, such a moderate proposal would have been a popular vote getter. 

No matter how sound your policies may be, you must win the election to have any chance of implementing them. What’s the good of having good ideas, if you never get a chance to implement. Stefanowski’s Democrat opponent, the far-wealthier Democrat Ned Lamont from Greenwich, the wealthiest town in the state, does not look like a businessman. His strategy is to appeal to the Democrat base made up of public service unions, depressed cities, and suburban women upset about the supposed threat to women’s rights posed by the likes of Trump and Kavanaugh.

Democrat Ned Lamont

Stefanowski has little time left to make a dent in that coalition. Is it too late to go to Bridgeport and Hartford and express concern about the crime rate and the poor schools in those cities which have been controlled and mismanaged for decades by Democrats? It’s worth a try. Otherwise, he will share the fate of McMahon and Foley who spent millions only to come up short.

### 

Kavanaugh Hearing Conclusion

    

Tarred and Feathered

I did not watch last week’s Senate confirmation hearing that featured the dramatic confrontation between Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford who has accused him of sexually molesting her 36 years ago when she was fifteen years old at a house party. Fortunately, important matters kept me out of the house since I had no desire to listen to what has turned into a national disgrace. 

Nevertheless, on the way home my wife and I turned on the car radio right in the middle of Judge Kavanaugh’s spirited and emotional defense. Actually, I thought something might have been wrong with the reception since it seemed to keep breaking up. Only later, did I discover that it was Kavanaugh himself breaking up in tears as he defended himself from the charges.

I thought that Kavanaugh did an excellent job although it seemed obvious that nothing he said would have had any impact on the Democrat senators on the committee whose minds were made up long ago. One commentator remarked that how you felt about Roe v. Wade determined how you felt about Kavanaugh’s guilt or innocence. 

I did not hear Christine Blasey Ford present her charges but have read about her testimony and the subsequent charges that have come forward. It seems to me that it is not just a question about who is lying and who is telling the truth. It might also be instructive to consider the consequences of their versions of the truth.

I believe that it would have been the easy way out for Judge Kavanaugh to admit that as a drunken teenager he groped a fifteen-year-old and threw her on a bed at a wild house party. He did admit that he liked to drink beer, and it seems that drunken house parties were common in the high school set in which he traveled. He could even have claimed that given his semi-inebriated state, he had no recollection of the incident.

He could then have gone on to say that if foolish and shameful things he did while as a teenager were going to be held against him and disqualify him for office, then many people now in office, even in the Senate, might have to resign their positions. 

But Kavanaugh did not say that. Rather he proclaimed his innocence and argued that it was his behavior and career as an adult that should determine his qualifications to serve on the Supreme Court. Incredibly, the impassioned defense of his innocence only made his detractors more certain of his guilt. Whether Kavanaugh is confirmed or not, his reputation has been tarred for life.

On the other hand, Christine Blasey Ford’s unsubstantiated accusation has made her a national hero in the eyes of half the population. The very fact that her story cannot be substantiated also means that it can never be proved that she was lying. 

Actually, it would not matter to many of her supporters if Dr. Ford was lying or not. They firmly believe that lying and false accusations are just one weapon that they can employ if their cause is just. They can shout down and disrespect opponents whose ideas they cannot abide.

In the recent hearings was it just a senior moment that led Senator Diane Feinstein to wait six weeks to ask the FBI to investigate Dr. Ford’s letter? Why did one of Feinstein’s staffers leak the letter after Dr. Ford had requested confidentiality? Why did demonstrators seek to disrupt the hearings in the first place? Why did Yale Law students travel to Washington to protest, in effect, against due process and the right of accused to be presumed innocent until proven guilty? 

I would not be surprised if Dr. Ford went on to a new position at a more prestigious university. I would also not be surprised if book deals, lecture tours, TV appearances, and a movie are also being proposed. We just have to look at Anita Hill’s rise to fame and position after her accusations against Judge Clarence Thomas years ago. Hill is a darling of the feminist movement while Thomas serves in relative obscurity on the Supreme Court. 

###

Clerical Sexual Abuse Reports

                                         

The recent findings of a Pittsburgh grand jury investigation into sexual abuse of minors by Catholic clergy in a number of Pennsylvania churches have shocked the nation as well as the Catholic faithful. The grand jury investigated claims of sexual abuse of minors over the past 70 years. Headlines indicated that around 300 priests had abused around 1000 children. Even more shocking were the lurid details in the more than 800-page report.

Here are some facts about the report. During the past seventy years a total of 5000 priests served in the six dioceses under investigation. The 300 accused clergy were not all priests. Some were religious brothers, deacons, or seminarians.  But let’s say that they all were  clergy in one form or another. The 300 accused made up about 6% of the 5000 who served during those years. *

I use the word “accused” because so far none of the accusations of sexual abuse that took place over 30 years ago have been verified by either the grand jury or the dioceses involved. The district attorney is seeking to change the statute of limitations law so that prosecutions can be launched.

Nevertheless, based on other studies it is likely that half of the 300 accused were indeed guilty. That leaves about 150 guilty parties. That figure conforms with earlier studies that have indicated that the abusers made up about two to three percent of the clergy. That is, for every 100 clergymen, three were probably guilty as accused. 

The Pennsylvania report also confirmed earlier studies that demonstrated that the great majority of the victims were teen-age boys. To put it another way, of the small percentage of clergy who violated their vow of chastity and became sexual predators, the great majority were homosexual men. They were not pedophiles because by definition, pedophiles prey on pre-pubescent boys and girls. 

Experience as a practicing Catholic for over 70 years makes me suspect that homosexuals made up a larger percentage of the clergy than 2%. I also believe that majority of them were true to their vows. Most homosexual men do not prey upon teen age boys. But the facts remain. Most of the men who were creditably charged were homosexual men who abused multiple young men.

Although the Pennsylvania grand jury study got a great deal of attention, it was basically old news. Most of the cases occurred in the last century at the time of the outset of the sexual revolution in the sixties and seventies. Most of the clergy named in the report are either dead or long deprived of their clerical positions. What was new and surprising was the accusations of homosexual activity in Catholic seminaries.

This news tied in with the news that charges of sexual abuse of young men by Cardinal Theodore Mc Carrack, the former head of the prestigious diocese of Washington D.C., had been found creditable. McCarrack has been accused of not only molesting teen-age boys but also seminarians over a long period of time. The charges were so creditable that Pope Francis asked Mc Carrack, already retired as Bishop of Washington, to resign as a member of the College of Cardinals.

Mc Carrack’s case seems to have been just the tip of the iceberg. Many reports are surfacing that seminaries in the latter part of the last century had been infiltrated by homosexual priests who preyed upon young candidates for the priesthood. Some even suggest that to get along, you had to go along, and that seminarians who resisted either wound up in poor assignments, or just left the seminary. 

The good, the bad, and the ordinary can be found in any organization. Some of the priests and religious I have encountered in my lifetime as a Catholic have approached sainthood, but the great majority have been ordinary with the same faults and failings of anyone else. 

But the bad, although few, can be like the proverbial worm in the apple and make everyone look bad. Experience and common sense make me believe that a small percentage of heterosexual clergy were not true to their vows. Indeed, I think that many of the men who leave the priesthood have a lady in waiting. 

Nevertheless, the great majority of sexual molesters were homosexual men whose influence in the past seems to have far exceeded their numbers. Mc Carrack’s case is a sign that homosexual influence went from the seminaries to the highest ranks of the Church. Commentators have suggested that the problem in the seminaries has largely been eliminated but that problems still exist in the highest ranks of the Church.

A recent letter sent to Pope Francis by Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, an Italian prelate who had served as Papal nuncio or ambassador to the United States for years, claimed that he had told Pope Francis about Mc Carrack’s record five years ago but that the Pope had declined to take action.  Moreover, Vigano claimed that some other high ranking prelates in Rome were part of a powerful homosexual lobby. Vigano has even called upon Pope Francis to resign. So far, the Pope has remained silent but has convened a bishop’s conference early next year to address the issue. The media in America has also been largely silent on the Vigano accusations perhaps because they deal with homosexual predators.

My own bishop has tried to address the new revelations by calling for the faithful to pray and attend masses of reparation. I fail to see why the faithful have to offer reparation. More and more it seems to me that the laity make up the real strength of the Church and that the hierarchy has much to account for.

###

*Details of the report have come from an article by William A. Donovan, the President of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, that appeared in the Sept. 2018 issue of Catalyst, the League’s periodical. Donovan is a partisan but he is a trained sociologist who has read the whole report, and written about the clerical abuse scandal for years.

Kavanaugh Confirmation Hearings

                                          

The Senate hearings for the confirmation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court made it clear that the opposition was more than about the obvious issues. The idea that Kavanaugh’s appointment will somehow protect President Trump from impeachment is absurd. A President is charged or impeached in the House of Representatives and then tried in the Senate, not the Supreme Court.

Democrat politicians do fear that Kavanaugh would tip the balance of the court on abortion and lead to the overturn of the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. Roe v. Wade is not a law but a Supreme Court ruling that overturned state laws restricting or banning abortion. If the Supreme Court were to overturn that ruling, it would be up to the individual states to pass new laws banning or restricting abortion in their jurisdictions. Otherwise, women would still be free to choose abortion.

No matter what you think about abortion or Roe v. Wade, it should be clear to any fair minded person that a very large percentage of the abortions performed since the original ruling have involved black women. White women have accounted for about half of the approximately 50 Million abortions performed since 1973 but black women who make up a much smaller share of the total population have accounted for about 20 Million abortions or 40% of the total. It is clear that Roe v. Wade has played a significant role in limiting the increase of the black population in this country.

Some sociologists think that this phenomenon is a good thing and that abortion has worked to keep down the crime rate and poverty rate in the country, especially among the “lower classes.” That was certainly the objective of Margaret Sanger, the famed birth-control pioneer on the 1920s. 

Back then Sanger would not have been called a racist. She was a “eugenicist” a word derived from the so-called science of eugenics that claimed that some races and ethnic groups were inherently inferior to others. She argued that immigration from some poor countries like Italy where poverty, ignorance, superstition, immorality, and crime prevailed should be restricted. She also believed that blacks were inherently inferior, and that they should be discouraged from “breeding,” or reproducing themselves.

Eugenics provided a kind of scientific basis for laws in the South prohibiting “miscegenation”, or marriage between members of different races. They said it led to “mongrelization.” In the 1930s the Nazis in Germany became the greatest advocates of eugenics. It provided a scientific basis for policies to eliminate not only the Jews, but also any inferior racial or ethnic types. Their idea of a master race was a creation of eugenics. Of course, eugenics went out of favor after World War II and the Holocaust.

Many years ago I went to a conference where a female, black doctor predicted that abortion would eventually lead to the disappearance of the black race in America. I don’t think her prediction will come true but it is clear that abortion has kept down the population of blacks in this country.

I think the real objection to Judge Kavenaugh is that he is a white male who is also intelligent and successful. Moreover, he is also a Catholic who seems to take his faith seriously unlike many Catholics in high places today. His record as a judge is so outstanding that Democrats had to largely ignore it and ask for millions of documents in order to try to dig up some dirt. At the hearings it was obvious that critical questioners sought to demonstrate that the judge would make decisions harmful to women, blacks, and other minorities.

But why would a white racist be opposed to abortion when it is clear that it has been so successful in keeping down the black and Hispanic population in this country? You would think that racists would be all in favor of abortion. Or would it be better to say that, despite their words and intentions, the supporters of abortion today are the real racists.

During the Vice-Presidential debate before the last election, Republican candidate Mike Pence, another conservative white male, made an unabashedly Pro-Life statement, and argued that the State has an inherent interest in supporting the right to life of the most vulnerable of its citizens. He noted that as Governor he had worked hard to make Indiana a pro-adoption state. 

His opponent Tim Kaine did note that he was Catholic and proud of his Catholic heritage and education. But he argued that despite his personal opposition to abortion, he had done nothing to oppose it as Governor of Virginia, and would certainly support Hillary Clinton’s intention, if elected President, to provide federal funding for abortion.

The Democrat strategy is very cunning. They can appear to be the champions of women, especially the poor and underprivileged, but at the same time, they support measures that have kept the population of Blacks and Hispanics down. Despite contemporary left-wing rhetoric on behalf of the under-privileged, it is still outcomes or results that count. 

The young Progressives of today have been brought up viewing popular TV shows like Law and Order where the great majority of criminals are successful white males. Only rarely are the villains women, black, Hispanic or members of the LGBTQ minority. Nevertheless, the liberal creators and producers of these shows, like Harvey Weinstein of the famed Miramax studio, or Leslie Moonves of ultra-politically correct CBS, are now the ones being charged with sexual abuse of women. Despite professed good intentions, could the media support for abortion be regarded as racist? 

###