Mana was Manure

The premeire documentary film festival in the U.S. is showing in Durham over the next four days. Apparently they host every year. I'm a sucker for documentaries. So I attended, "Mana: Beyond Belief" last night in an attempt to entertain myself and edify my unculturaled ways. The filmmakers who had just flew in from Paris gave some brief commentary prior to showtime. Nothing significant or earth shattering in their remarks except, " Don't take this film seriously." Hmmm. That registered as rather odd since the definition in the brochure refered to Mana as a a physic icon that elicits some sort of spiritual response or connection such as a the American flag or the Vietnam War Memorial. Hence the follow on title of "Beyond Belief." Therefore their film was going to be a montage of these objects throughout our world that possessed "mana." An introspective reflection of allegoric icons. Though there were a few examples presented such as the Japanese cherry blossoms, some religious shrine in perhaps Southeast Asia, a majority of the film felt disjuncted. The music selection was not congruent with the flow of the film and most of the symbols I didn't fell the mana, especially the last segment reference someone's larger than life art project. Mind you it was interesting but not mana quality. Our world is litered with icons. The crucifix, the virgin mary on the dash, the Lincoln memorial, the Grand Canyon, etc. The idea was sound, the execution poor. However there was one humorous segment: the American flag. Sounds seditious but what the filmmakers uncovered was truly priceless. Constituents can write to their congressmen for a US flag that is flown over the capitol building in Washington, D.C. and specific dates that perhaps commerate a specific moment in time for that individual. As the congressmen is speaking the footage shows flags literally being zipped up one of three flag poles on the side of the capitol building. The flags are only attached by one eyelet and are immediately brought down as soon as they reach the top. In one scene they even raise two flags attached to the same laynard. Then at the end they hoist this huge basket full of flag boxes with a small crane. All the while the congressman is pontificating about the significance about the flag. He even admitted to not knowing or witnessing how the process work. If he only knew. Or he soon will. Some comic relief to wake me up from my boredom. And how did I rate the movie? 3 out 10 (score cards were required for submission post the movie). What was beyond my belief was that I paid $10. But the experience made up for the difference in the quality of the film.

Foot in Mouth Dz

Bush spoke after touring the Bureau of Public Debt in Parkersburg, W.Va., about the $1.7 trillion in Treasury bonds that make up the trust fund...

W: "There is no trust fund -- just IOUs that I saw firsthand. Imagine, the retirement security for future generations is sitting in a filing cabinet."


14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, Section 4: The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.

In other words, these "IOUs" not only have the backing of the US Government, but are binding under the Constitution of the United States. The Constitution says quite clearly that public debt shall not be questioned yet there is Bush doing just that, in order to push the plan/non-plan scheme of piratizing Social Security. Same old scare tactic. When creating a backing for an invasion into Iraq he used the threat of WMD and then the supposed collusion with Al Queda. The question becomes, does the American public become intimidated into submission once more.

Rep. Nancy Pelosi's has rightly called Bush to task over this staggering statement, saying "This is the first time that a President of the United States has declared that we, the United States Government, will not put the full faith and credit of the federal government behind the Social Security trust fund. What this President is saying is, we have two kinds of debt. Let's see how we get the debt first. It is in deficit spending, so we have to go borrow in order to keep the government going."

That is a decent statement, but this is not just about the imprudence of Bush's words, or the bad idea it is for finical markets, politically, etc. but that what he is saying is directly un-Constitutional, and the basic premise behind them and what he is in essence suggesting are directly un-Constitutional.