Categories
Opinion Viewpoint

The Endless Campaign

Among those still interested in fiscal sanity, and that includes quite a few Republicans, I bring your attention to two tax cuts that should be repealed right now for the sound reason that they are perfectly nuts.

A whopping 54 percent of the two cuts goes to the two-tenths of 1 percent of Americans who make more than $1 million a year. And 97 percent of the cuts goes to the 4 percent of the population with incomes over $200,000. (All figures are from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and the Joint Committee on Taxation.)

The two cuts were not part of President Bush’s original tax-cut proposals; they were slipped in by Congress in 2001 and will be fully effective in 2010. One repeals a provision that scales back the magnitude of itemized deductions taken by high-income taxpayers. The other repeals a provision under which the personal exemption is phased out for households with very high incomes. The Joint Committee estimates that these two tax cuts will reduce the government’s income by $9 billion in 2010 and $16 billion in 2015.

The center’s report adds, “If these two tax cuts were to be cancelled … Congress and the president could avert cuts in areas like health care, child care, housing assistance and food stamp assistance for low-income working families.”

It is a rather clear choice of moral values.

Also of note is what appears to be a new dimension in how monied special interests buy legislation through Congress. We are all familiar with corporate lobbyists and the system of legalized bribery known as “campaign finance.”

But now comes an unholy tsunami of corporate money aimed not at politicians but at us. Over $200 million will be spent to convince us that we should privatize Social Security and change the rules of class-action lawsuits. In other words, they want to make us in favor of our own screwing by corporate special interests.

This has been done before but not at this incredible level. When the insurance industry mounted a $10 million campaign in 1993 to defeat the Clinton health insurance plan, no one had ever seen that kind of money spent to kill a single bill before. Now, The Washington Post reports, “Corporate America, the financial services industry, conservative think tanks, much of the Washington trade association community, the Republican Party, and GOP lobbyists and consultants are prepared to spend $200 million or more to influence the outcome of two of the toughest legislative fights in recent memory.”

Bush’s Social Security pri-vatization plan is so bad (not to mention that it doesn’t fix Social Security, as even he now admits), it is unclear if even a massive public relations campaign can save it. But be prepared to watch them try. Coming soon: ad after ad assuring you that Social Security is going broke right now and only private accounts can save it. The sponsors of these ads will all have lovely names, like “Committee to Save America” and “Society to Save Old Folks.” But it’s pure political propaganda.

The point of tort reform is not to save business from a nonexistent “flood” of frivolous lawsuits. The flood is just as phony as the Social Security “crisis.” It’s a fight between big business and the trial lawyers, and as the African proverb says, “When elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers.” What we stand to lose is the great American right to sue the bastards. What business calls tort “reform” just means the doors of the courthouse will be shut to average citizens.

The latest onslaught of special interest money is $10 million from a lobbying group called USA Next, which will be used solely to attack the AARP for opposing Bush’s privatization plan.

“They [AARP] are the boulder in the middle of the highway to personal savings accounts,” said Charlie Jarvis, president of USA Next. “We will be the dynamite that removes them.”

It’s not bad enough we have to fight corporate lobbyists and huge campaign donations. Now we have to deal with an endless Republican campaign on specific issues. n

Molly Ivins writes for Creators Syndicate.

Categories
Film Features Film/TV

Best in Show

The best picture of 2004 won’t win that Oscar this year, alas, because the best of 2004 wasn’t nominated: Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. Written by Charlie Kaufman and directed by Michael Gondry, there was not a film released in 2004 that could match Eternal Sunshine in emotional depth, cinematic invention, development of character, and social consequence.

Oscar and I have had differences before, and we will again. No hard feelings, right? However, I have taken the liberty of creating my own awards for films and performances that Oscar overlooked, which I shall list alongside my Oscar predictions. I’ll call them the Boseys.

ACTOR IN A SUPPORTING ROLE

Alan Alda — The Aviator

Thomas Haden Church — Sideways

Jamie Foxx — Collateral

Morgan Freeman — Million Dollar Baby (will win and should win)

Clive Owen — Closer

This is a contest between three men. Alda’s nomination is a thank-you for years of fine work and good sportsmanship. Foxx’s nomination would be competitive if he weren’t also nominated for Ray’s leading performance — which he will win. Sideways won’t win Best Picture, but if academians want to acknowledge the film, they might go with Haden Church. I think the nomination is thanks enough. Clive Owen may surprise all and take it, though the nomination will certainly accomplish as much as a win would for Owen’s rising career. But it’s Freeman’s year — a valedictory for a distinguished career, no previous wins, and a performance that reminds us that it takes more effort to create an old, worn-out shoe from scratch than a new one.

But the Bosey goes to Danny Huston for Birth. There was, for me, no finer supporting performance last year. In a film that could have drifted too far from the real, Huston grounded co-star Nicole Kidman and the film itself with alternating patience and rage.

ACTRESS IN A SUPPORTING ROLE

Cate Blanchett — The Aviator

(will win and should win)

Laura Linney — Kinsey

Virginia Madsen — Sideways

Sophie Okonedo — Hotel Rwanda

Natalie Portman — Closer

Portman, in her first adult role, shares with Okonedo “the nomination is your prize” nod that goes along with performances the academy wants to recognize but not award. Their nominations, like Owen’s, will get them better projects and more clout down the road, so no additional award is necessary. Linney is a Hollywood favorite and somewhat overdue, but Kinsey‘s overall exclusion from major categories makes her nomination the only laurel I think it will get. Madsen will win only if there is a doubtful Sideways sweep, so I think Blanchett will go home with the gold in a nod both to Blanchett’s extraordinary interpretation of The Aviator’s Katharine Hepburn and to Hepburn herself.

But the Bosey goes to It’s a tie. Were there two more striking performances by supporting actresses last year than Bryce Howard of The Village or Irma P. Hall of The Ladykillers? Howard’s magnetism and gravity and Hall’s doting Christian fire made silk purses out of sows’ ears last year, elevating mediocre films to a degree of distinction otherwise unearned.

ACTOR IN A LEADING ROLE

Don Cheadle — Hotel Rwanda

Johnny Depp — Finding Neverland

Leonardo DiCaprio — The Aviator

Clint Eastwood — Million Dollar Baby

Jamie Foxx — Ray

(will win and should win)

Jamie Foxx will win this for his towering, unforgettable turn as the beloved Ray Charles. Case closed. The only possible spoiler is Eastwood, who, among the other nominees, is the least likely to be nominated again and win. And who among you who saw Million Dollar Baby was not stunned to see the man cry?

But the Bosey goes to Gael Garcia Bernal for Pedro Almodovar’s Bad Education. This is an extremely difficult role made to look extremely easy by this rising star. And the mercurial nature of the film makes this, truly, maybe three different performances rolled into one. All good.

ACTRESS IN A LEADING ROLE

Annette Bening — Being Julia

Catalina Sandino Moreno — Maria Full of Grace

Imelda Staunton — Vera Drake

(should win)

Hilary Swank — Million Dollar Baby

(will win)

Kate Winslet — Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind

Some view this as a rematch between 1999’s divas Swank and Bening from Boys Don’t Cry and American Beauty, respectively. It’s not. Bening’s lovely performance might win in a weaker year but not alongside the more substantial fare in this category. Newcomer Moreno, repeat after me: “It’s an honor just to be nominated.” Kate Winslet: “Once again, not my year.” Only Staunton, I think, has a shot at unseating the favorite, Swank, who buffed and trained like a pro boxer to play just that in a performance that was both triumphant and heartbreaking. But Staunton, a mostly unknown career veteran of third-banana roles in mostly British art-house fare, provides a more thorough, heartfelt performance. I would not begrudge Swank, but my heart is with Staunton.

But the Bosey goes to Nicole Kidman, who made too many movies last year. However, two of them, Dogville and Birth, feature extraordinary work by her, with her sensitive turn in Birth as the stand-out. Not better than Swank or Staunton, but remember the Bosey is given to what Oscar overlooked.

DIRECTOR

Martin Scorsese — The Aviator (will win and should win)

Clint Eastwood — Million Dollar Baby

Taylor Hackford — Ray

Alexander Payne — Sideways

Michael Leigh –-Vera Drake

BEST PICTURE

The Aviator (should win)

Finding Neverland

Million Dollar Baby (will win)

Ray

Sideways

Both categories are between two men: Eastwood and Scorsese. The overrated Sideways may surprise all, but these elder statesmen of American film have crafted these categories’ finest work. The Aviator, as a film, does dozens of things excellently while Million Dollar Baby does a few things perfectly, and I think that this is the difference between the two. Philosophically then, I should prefer Baby, but I don’t. I was compelled more by The Aviator, which managed to be as much an intimate examination of character as it was a grand-scale pageant of Hollywood and politics.

But the Bosey goes to Michel Gondry and his Eternal Sunshine, of course, for the reasons mentioned above (darn you, Oscar!). But in second place for the Bosey: Sam Raimi and Spider-Man 2. Scoff all you want, but was there a more effective film in all of 2004? It mastered its genre and improved on its 2002 original with a great story, swell character development, and lots of heart. I would also have been happy to have Fahrenheit 9/11′s Michael Moore or The Passion of the Christ’s Mel Gibson nominated as directors but not their films, which were problematic and not better than the other nominees in the Best Picture category. Who were better than Moore or Gibson at telling their stories with focus and precision, not to mention well passion?

Categories
Politics Politics Beat Blog

MAGNANIMOUS HOOKS: NOBODY HAD “HARD ON” FOR HIM

After listening to testimony from lawyers for both Michael Hooks and the state of Tennessee, Chancellor Arnold Goldin Wednesday ruled in Hooks’ favor and ordered Hooks reinstated as a candidate in a forthcoming state Senate election. Goldin thereby struck down a prior adverse ruling against Hooks by the state Election Registry and state Election Commissioner Brook Thompson, who had declared the Shelby County Commission chairman ineligible to run for the seat because Hooks had not met financial-disclosure deadlines.

Reviewing a record that showed historic inconsistency between enforcement actions and deadline requirements of state and local election officials, Goldin said it would be “fundamentally unfair” and “difficult to justify” disallowing Hooks’ candidacy for the District 33 seat, vacated recently by longtime incumbent Roscoe Dixon, now an aide to Shelby County Mayor A C Wharton..

Goldin’s action means that the Democratic primary will now be a three-way race between Hooks, state Representative Kathryn Bowers, and James Harvey. A fourth candidate, state Representative Joe Towns, had also been disallowed by the state agencies — in his case, for failure to pay accumulated fines relating to violation of disclosure requirements — but Towns did not appeal the finding.

Hooks’ reentry means that Bowers, who doubles as Shelby County Democratic chairman, will have another name candidate to contend with and not just the relatively unknown Harvey.

Bowers had called a press conference Monday to deny that she had used her political influence to get Hooks disqualified — an allegation that Hooks insisted Wednesday he had never made.

“I think she’s just looking for publicity. I never once thought that or said that. That would make them [the various state officials who signed off on his disqualification] dishonorable. In fact, they’re not. I’ve worked with them for many years. They don’t have a hard on for Michael Hooks. They’re just interpreting the law and trying to do their job.” One of his first legislative missions, if elected, will be to reconcile “discrepancies” between the state and local election codes, Hooks said.

“I think the judge did the right thing to let the people decide who they want to be their state senator. It won’t be determined by nit-picking or hag-nagging. It’ll be on the issues,” said Hooks. Acknowledging that the delay caused by his litigation had inconvenienced his campaign somewhat, he said, “We kept working. Of course, we stopped spending and planning our advertising campaigns and so forth. We’ll have to catch up.”

Categories
We Recommend We Recommend

thursday, 24

Pardon me if you have already read about this, but I have taken a break from writing this column every week for some 16 years and am now writing just every other week and sometimes I have some catching up to do. And to my friend who is trying to get me to go back and find the information I wrote some years ago about a carload of Pentecostals being arrested for driving through Arkansas buck naked in their car, I implore you to be patient and let this little tidbit suffice for the time being. I’ll get around to the naked Pentecostals soon. In the meantime, it seems that just a few weeks ago, jury selection began in a trial here in Memphis involving a woman accused of hitting her brother’s girlfriend in the face with a brick at a trailer park. This is not a joke. It happened. According to reports, right after jury selection began, one man got up and left, announcing, “I’m on morphine and I’m higher than a kite.” Goodness. I would have been his buddy from the get-go. Then, when the prosecutor asked if anyone had been convicted of a crime, a prospective juror said that he had been arrested and taken to a mental hospital after he almost shot his nephew. He said he was provoked because his nephew “just would not come out from under the bed.” Probably on morphine the nephew, that is, and probably with good reason. Another would-be juror said he had had alcohol problems and was arrested for soliciting sex from an undercover officer. “I should have known something was up,” the prospective juror proclaimed. “She had all her teeth!” In the end, the woman accused of hitting the other woman in the face with the brick was found not guilty. Whew. And you thought John Ford was embarrassing. You thought it was embarrassing that the city has decided to lay off 2,100 people and stop providing food to hungry senior citizens in order to cut the fat out of the budget, just a couple of months after a certain city government body ran up a $4,000 tab at a holiday dinner that included 28 bottles of wine. And if you didn’t catch this little bit of news, it bears repeating that the Bush administration just got caught again planting yet another public relations person posing as a reporter at a White House press conference. They’ve been doing a lot of this lately, with the ersatz reporters helping push the Republican agenda. Only thing is, this guy not only got exposed, it came out (no pun intended) that one of the companies he owns is the registered owner of some Web sites that don’t exactly push that same agenda namely, Hotmilitarystud.com. Hee-hee. But don’t worry. Unless it’s just my old computer being crabby, the site is already down. Imagine that. But on to bigger and better things: what’s going on around town this week, and there’s a lot. Tonight, Confirmation featuring Kenneth Whalum III and Gerald Barnes is at CafÇ Soul. Twin Soul is at the Flying Saucer. And Higher Ground, six vignettes that explore humanity and the American world, opens at Rhodes College’s McCoy Theatre. — Tim Sampson

Categories
Politics Politics Beat Blog

POLITICS

IN OR OUT?Guess what? Contrary to most news reports, 7th District congressman Marsha Blackburn has not renounced the idea of running for the U.S. Senate in 2006. Nor did the statement she released back on February 11th say so.

Moreover, Blackburn — interviewed in Memphis Saturday night at the annual Lincoln Day Dinner of the Shelby County Republican Party — declined, when pressed on the issue, to make a categorical statement of non-candidacy. What she said instead: “Well, we’ll just have to see.”

The kernel of her February 11th statement, headed “Blackburn Announces Senate Decision in a Letter to the People of Tennessee,” was to be found in the last two paragraphs of that lengthy document. They read as follows:

“I will remain in the House and serve the 7th Congressional District for the next two years as we fight to promote a culture of life, protect family values, and reduce government spending. I have been touched and honored by all those across the state who have asked me to consider a run for the U.S. Senate, but now is the time for my focused work in the U.S. House of Representatives.

“Tennessee and the Republican Party are fortunate to have an emerging field of talented and dedicated individuals willing to serve the state. I wish them well. And, I want to assure all those who support our ideals that, as in the past, I will be there to lend my voice and my energy to electing a strong conservative Republican senator in 2006.”

It was pointed out to Rep. Blackburn on Saturday night that the first of those paragraphs can be interpreted as meaning no more than that she will serve out the two-year term which she won in her successful reelection campaign last year — a fact which would not preclude a Senate campaign in 2006. She smiled and chose not to rebut such an interpretation. Instead, she said only that the statement reads “exactly the way I wanted it to.”

It was also pointed out to Rep. Blackburn that the promise in the concluding paragraph of her statement to “lend my voice and my energy to electing a strong conservative Republican senator in 2006” was not inconsistent with the possibility of herself being that “strong conservative” candidate. Again, she affirmed only that the statement, as written, reflected her sentiments and declined to make a more categorical statement of non-candidacy.

Was it possible that future events could still result in her becoming a Senate candidate, after all? “Well, we’ll just have to see,” she repeated.

The three Republican Senate candidates declared so far — former 7th District congressman Ed Bryant, Chattanooga mayor Bob Corker, and state Representative Beth Harwell — were on hand for the Shelby County Lincoln Day dinner, as was former 4th District congressman Van Hilleary, whose announcement of candidacy is imminently expected (“I’ll have something to say probably within the next 10 days,” he said Saturday night). All four had been present, too, at Thursday night’s Williamson County Lincoln Day Dinner, where they each spoke briefly. They did not speak at the Memphis event, which was addressed by U.S. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Alphonso Jackson, though Blackburn made some brief remarks.

Will she be asked for further clarification of her February 11th statement, or will the media and the field of declared Senate hopefuls just let it be? Well, thats something we’ll just have to see.

Saturday night’s GOP dinner was the swan song for outgoing Shelby County chairman Kemp Conrad. He will be succeeded at next Sunday’s biennial Republican convention at White Station High School by Bill Giannini, who is unopposed for election as chairman.

During his term, Conrad made a point of stressing minority outreach, and Jackson’s appearance Saturday night capped those efforts, in a sense.

For his part, the HUD secretary, an African American, extolled what he said were the civil rights contributions of such former Republican luminaries as Illinois Senator Everett Dirksen and president Dwight Eisenhower, both now deceased. Jackson also criticized two late Democratic senators — J. William Fulbright of Arkansas (accurately) and Albert Gore Sr. of Tennessee (perhaps inaccurately) for obstructing civil rights legislation. He further said the Ku Klux Klan had originated as a “extension of the Democrats.”

Ironically, the race for the state senate seat in predominantly Democratic District 33, vacated last month by Shelby County mayoral aide Roscoe Dixon, now has more GOP candidates than Democrats. Republicans running are Mary Lynn Flood, Jason Hernandez, Mary Ann McNeil, and Barry Sterling. Democrats remaining, pending the result of an appeal by Shelby County Commission chairman Michael Hooks, are state Rep. Kathryn Bowers and James Harvey.

Hooks was disqualified by the state Election Registry for failure to file financial disclosures, while state Rep. Joe Towns withdrew after being ruled ineligible for failure to pay previous fines assessed by the Registry for incomplete or absent disclosures.

Categories
News The Fly-By

BUNKER BUSTING

Theocratically inclined and occasionally slippery county school board member Wyatt Bunker, who successfully lobbied for a Bible class in county schools, is up to his old tricks again. Fearful that children might actually learn about the scientific method as applied to the theory of evolution, Bunker wants to have stickers placed on science textbooks pointing out that theories are as the word itself suggests not facts. That’s fine as long as Bunker agrees to have another sticker placed on all student Bibles reading, “Creationism is a myth.” — Chris Davis

Plante: How It Looks

Categories
News News Feature

BARNSTORMING

NIGHT OF THE HUNTER

“It is a nervous thing to consider: Not just four more years of Nixon, but Nixon’s last four years in politics – completely unshackled, for the first time in his life, from any need to worry about who might or might not vote for him the next time around. If he wins in November, he will finally be free to do whatever he wants…or maybe ‘wants’ is too strong a word for right now. It conjures up images of Papa Doc, Batista, Somoza; jails full of bewildered ‘political prisoners’ and the constant cold-sweat fear of jackboots suddenly kicking your door off its hinges at four A.M.”
Fear & Loathing on the Campaign Trail

Read this message from the grave. Read it and cry bubba, because only a few weeks back Bill Clinton was on Air America explaining in vivid detail the many reasons why Richard Millhouse Nixon was a bleeding-heart lefty compared to the flag-waving, Bible thumping, whore humping yahoos who’ve hijacked our nuclear joystick. And now Hunter S. Thompson -the great chronicler of American political weirdness- has swallowed a bullet. I guess I should have seen it coming. The old dog was half crippled and had to put himself down before the rats got strong enough to eat him alive. Or maybe, after all these years, the medicine just went bad.

Oh for fuck’s sake, it was never about the goddamn drugs. Of course he used them, and he wrote about using them. Drugs are a convenient excuse for some excellent swinery: A little chemical collateral for the Woodstock Generation, and for X-ers who like to slurp down a latte or two while buying their rebellion off the shelf at Barns & Noble. That’s the method. But there was also madness.

Thompson didn’t invent Gonzo, he was Gonzo. His formula was too easy to suss: Go to the horse track and describe everything you see in grotesque detail except for the races which must be ignored at all costs. Hacks concern themselves with who’s ahead and who’s behind; whores flock to the winner’s circle. Doctors of Journalism only want to see the accidentally good staring down the intolerably wicked in an all-holds-allowed battle for the cosmos. Fuck the horses man; where the hell are the trainers (they’re holding the good shit, I just know it)–and what does a man have to do to get a Goddamn drink around here, piss on a jockey?

Like Jackson Pollock, the action painter whose insane splatters earned him the nickname “Jack the Dripper” Thompson’s best work seemed scattershot–something any monkey might produce given enough time and mescaline. But the Gonzo was camouflage for the author’s studied craftsmanship. This mad style of New Journalism required a scribe like Thompson who was so obsessed with the musicality of language that he retyped page after page from Hemingway and Fitzgerald like a crazed cartographer determined to know every bend, twist, and sandbar in the great river of American literature.

I met and studied briefly with another counterculture hero– Alan Ginsburg–back when I was a freshman in college. During a particularly foul wine and cheese-cube mixer, A.G. started talking about his guru. If I understood the conversation correctly said guru–fully licensed I presume–thought that people with subversive spirits should dress more like bankers. I was soused and thought this was the funniest thing I’d ever heard. “So what are you now Alan, some kind of spook?” I asked. “Because that sounds like cloak and dagger talk to me–real cold-war commie tactics.” If the old poet was amused he didn’t let on.

Funny. Now it seems like Thompson–who let his freak flag fly like a March fart–may have been the real spy in the game. His famously awful behavior–so predictably chaotic–gave the old addict a fool’s platform and the ability to speak truth to power. That was always Thompson’s cover–and his trump card.

“But our trip was different,” he wrote in Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. “It was to be a classic affirmation of everything right and true in the national character. A gross physical salute to the fantastic possibilities of life in this country. But only for those with true grit.”

The good Doctor’s last wish? He wanted his charred remains shot out of a cannon in one final act of weirdness and revolution. I’m sure going to miss that gritty sonofabitch. I’ll miss him like a sonofabitch.

PLUS:

[Un]Wise?

Newsguy blogger Darrell Phillips has an e-mail response from Andy Wise concerning the Wise one’s recent tent-revival… I mean interview with Claudine Marsh, Mayor Willie Herenton’s baby mama. Here’s some of it:

When I wrote Claudine Marsh seeking an interview, I didn’t know at the time whether she had a personal relationship with Jesus. I was hoping to talk to her and give her an opportunity to set the record straight on whether or not Mayor Herenton was holding up his end of the bargain in the care of their son. Then she answered the letter, and we met, and it immediately became clear to me that she was a woman of faith, and not only did she want to set the record straight on Herenton, but she also felt moved by God to use her mistake, which she clearly took responsibility for, to encourage other young couples to abstain from sex until marriage…I am convinced that we made a connection through the Holy Spirit… I have been taught that we are supposed to be bold in our faith. Because it was clear to me that God had arranged this meeting with Claudine for a bigger purpose, I felt compelled to give him the glory on television.

Damn! Jesus Christ Superflack— who knew?

Weird stuff too since Jesus makes it pretty dawgone clear that believers should be bold in their works but HUMBLE in the outward display of faith— that’s why he regularly gives those gaudy, garment-rending Pharisees “the business.” Now if only the Nazarine would consider work as a station manager…

Okay, really: WTF? “It was clear to me that God had arranged this meeting with Claudine for a bigger purpose.” What makes that so clear Andy? And don’t say, “a still small voice inside,” because that’s not good enough to make it past the first edit… unless, that is, you’ve got that burning bush on the record, and on the freaking camera, know what I’m saying?

All these painted strumpets prancing around the new Temple of Jesus Christ Evangalist are truly insulting. They waste all of our time “putting God back in the equation,” when their beloved Bible clearly provides that God is the equation… or else he’s nothing at all. If everything you do his in HIS name, you better choose your shoutouts wisely Andy Wise.

Give HIM the glory… for reporting laundromat gossip fuel about a single mom’s awkward relationship with her baby daddy–the MAYOR? It’s more like he’s placing the effing blame. I swear to God.

Categories
Opinion

CITY BEAT

THE DEVIL’S IN THE DETAILS

Dr. O. C. Smith is on the ropes after taking a series of punishing shots from federal prosecutors and might have to take the stand himself to win his case.

The final piece of the prosecution’s evidence, presented Friday before the three-day weekend, was a three-hour videotape of Smith being interviewed and then gently grilled by United States Attorney Pat Harris and two investigators. The defense began presenting its case Tuesday.

The most damning thing about the tape, which was made on September 11, 2003, is that Smith changes a key part of his story about the alleged attack on him on June 1, 2002. Instead of the attacker reaching for a strand of barbed wire and tying Smith’s feet first and then his hands, the attacker ties Smith’s hands first in this version.

In statements given to authorities 15 months earlier on the day after the attack and on July 26, 2002, Smith says the attacker “sat with his weight on the small of my back and backside and gathered my leg by grabbing my ankle and bending them at the knees. He crossed my ankle right over left with one arm and wrapped my lower legs and ankle with the wire. … He let my feet go and turned on the top of me to wrap my right hand and left hand with separate strand (sic).”

But on the 2003 tape, Smith is asked by Harris what the attacker tied first.

“My hands and then my feet,” Smith says. Then he stammers for several seconds when Harris asks if the right hand or left hand was tied first. “He’s wrapping my right and then he’s wrapping my left, but I don’t know how he does it.”

The change in Smith’s story was a dead giveaway to investigators who had already concluded that Smith was lying. Cops are taught “hands are what hurt you,” testified Paul Kwiatkowski, a Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms agent specially trained in no-holds-barred fighting. If the attacker had tied the feet first, he would have been facing backwards and a simple push-up by Smith a physical fitness buff who claims to have taught Marines how to kill an enemy at close range would have either bucked him off or made it nearly impossible to tie his kicking feet with barbed wire.

“You’re either an absolute wuss or you gave up,” the rugged-looking Kwiatkowski tells Smith at one point on the tape.

The assumption is that even with an acid solution in his eyes, Smith would have his wits about him and would remember how his attacker had him pinned and whether his hands or feet were tied first. In fact, in his first two accounts he is clear on the point that his feet were tied first. In addition to that inconsistency, Smith’s stories have other flaws.

In one account, Smith sees the attacker quite clearly, describes his clothing and even thinks he might be able to pick him out of a police lineup. In another, the attacker is just a shadow before splashing a caustic solution from a plastic bottle in Smith’s face, all but blinding the 49-year-old doctor for the rest of the attack.

The attacker, alternately described as weighing 170 pounds or 200 pounds, is alone and does not threaten Smith with a gun or knife or beat him with a club of any kind. Smith, who usually carries a handgun and a knife, is conveniently unarmed on this night.

Neither Smith nor the attacker utters so much as a curse word or a cry for help during the entire attack. They come to grips, “frog march” down a flight of stairs, fall to the ground, and wrestle until Smith is lying face down and the attacker is sitting on the small of his back without either man making a sound louder than a grunt. Smith kicks out and swings and misses, and the attacker bops him on the back of his head with his elbow, again in silence.

By the time the attacker speaks, he has subdued Smith, kept him under control by simply sitting on him, reached for a stash of barbed wire, tied his feet, hands, and head without leaving so much as a drop of blood, lifted him up to a standing position, padlocked him face-first to a window grate in a crucified position, and put a bomb over his head. Only then does he whisper: “Push it, pull it, twist it, and you die. Welcome to death row.” Then he simply walks away into the hot night.

Smith is so focused on the pain that he is unaware that a University of Tennessee Medical Center police officer is checking the parking lot in his car and on foot a short time later. When a second cop comes by Smith says “it felt like three seconds or three years” he bangs the lock holding his left hand to the bars and is discovered and rescued.

Four hours later, he checks out of the hospital and goes back to his office. The next day, he is back at work, albeit with a bright red rash on the right side of his face that wasn’t apparent in the hours after the attack. Such is the story, or stories, that the jury has heard.

Smith is charged with two counts of lying and one count of unlawful possession of a bomb the one around his neck. Casual followers of this case may be tempted to take the NBA referee’s position “No Harm, No Foul” since Smith was unhurt and the bomb did not go off. But there were good reasons for pursuing this prosecution and better ones for punishing Smith if he is found guilty.

The bomb was the real deal. The jury has been shown detailed depictions of its components (shot, powder, a battery, and a triggering mechanism) and assemblage. Cops said it could have killed people. In one of the trial’s most dramatic moments, a gutsy former Memphis cop named Mike Willis, commander of the bomb squad in 2002, described how he and two other guys got the bomb off of Smith. Willis grabbed the bomb while a colleague cut the barbed wire.

“Once I had a hold of it, I’m not letting go,” said Willis.

He gently placed the bomb on a blue plastic barrel someone brought over. For a heart-stopping second, it rolled a little bit in an indentation in the top of the barrel, but it didn’t go off. Then Willis got out of there.

Willis, Smith, and two other police officers could have been killed or maimed if Willis had not been so sure-handed or if someone had accidentally kicked over the barrel.

Then there is the matter of the 15-month investigation leading up to the interview on September 11, 2003. Smith was not some homeless person, drunk, or someone violently resisting arrest ala Rodney King. Nor was he a convenient scapegoat like security guard Richard Jewell, wrongly accused of planting a bomb at the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta. To many cops, investigators and prosecutors in Memphis and Shelby County, Smith was “our doc,” a stand-up guy who would come to a crime scene in the middle of a cold, wet night and testified for them at hundreds of trials.

U.S. Attorney Terry Harris, who recused himself and the Western District of Tennessee office from the Smith case, worked with Smith for 14 years when Harris was a Shelby County prosecutor. On June 3, 2002, Harris called a meeting of virtually every local, state, and federal law enforcement agency with manpower in Memphis to tell them that finding the Smith attacker was his “number-one priority.” A total of 17 agencies followed up 112 leads before coming to the reluctant conclusion that Smith did it to himself. The cost of such an investigation and 24/7 protection for Smith and his wife in dollars and manpower was substantial at a time when the country was on terrorism alert.

In an unusual bit of courtroom drama, Harris was called to the witness stand last week to explain why his office was recused. He wound up testifying for several minutes about the transformation of Smith from victim to suspect, thanks in part to some inopportune questioning from defense attorney Jim Garts that opened the door for prosecutor Bud Cummins to allow Harris to essentially become a bonus witness for the government.

Harris seemed highly credible. In contrast to some of the government’s expert medical witnesses, the boyish-looking prosecutor spoke confidently but slowly and softly and used simple words. As Harris took the stand, Smith gave him a little wave. Harris said he considers Smith “a personal friend” and “part of law enforcement, certainly.” Harris came to the crime scene within hours of the attack, but Smith was already at the hospital, so Harris and an agent drove to Smith’s house in Atoka at six o’clock that morning.

“I was afraid he was going to be in much worse condition,” said Harris. “I was relieved to see he was not in terrible shape.”

Harris said it was a routine part of the early stage of the investigation to eliminate Smith as a suspect, although he did not say exactly how that was done or whether, as seems likely, some investigators suspected Smith from the get-go. A consensus opinion wasn’t reached for several months. It was based, Harris said, on several things including Smith’s superficial wounds, his lack of resistance, the lack of tears in his clothing, and inconsistencies in his stories.

Compared to celebrity expert witness Dr. Park Dietz, who testified later that morning about various mental disorders in staged crimes, Harris was a hammer, Dietz a feather.

In fictional mysteries, movies, and television shows, an omniscient narrator or super sleuth Matlock, Marlowe, Columbo, Sherlock Holmes, Sam Spade wraps up all the loose ends in a neat package. That’s not going to happen in this case, as prosecutors have admitted ever since Smith was indicted. If Smith staged the attack, his motives can only be guessed at based on the testimony of former colleagues who said he resented criticism and told tall tales and experts such as Dietz, who did not examine Smith.

Novelists and screenwriters ask readers for “the willing suspension of disbelief” for the sake of entertainment. In the Smith case, prosecutors are asking a jury to leave a few details of this mystery unsolved for the sake of justice.

Categories
News News Feature

HEAD SHOT

We were somewhere around Barstow on the edge of the desert when the drugs began to take hold.

For many of us of a certain age, that sentence — the opening line of Hunter Thompson’s Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas — reverberates like a great gong, tapping slightly addled memories of another life, 30 years gone, another universe. The news of his suicide this week, brought it all back.

It was a time when the weekly arrival of Rolling Stone meant “Do not disturb” for the next three hours. Nothing published today compares in terms of pop culture impact to RS in its prime. It was the bible of of the counter-culture, an absolute must-read. We devoured Lester Bangs and Ralph Gleason because what they wrote about the new Neil Young album meant something, because Bob Dylan’s lyrics had mythic importance, because the music, like the world, was ours.

And when the magazine published one of Thompson’s insane “reports,” accompanied the equally bizarre illustrations of Ralph Steadman, well, hipness could get no hipper. It was like we were all in on the same stony joke — all of us, reader, writer, artist, publisher.

Interview Nixon? No problem. Pass me that joint, first.

I lived in San Francisco then, and like so many other aspiring “gonzo” writers there and elsewhere, I fell under Thompson’s spell. Thankfully, very little of what I wrote in those days remains. The truth is, no one else could write like Thompson because no one else who imbibed illegal substances the way Thompson did could sit up at a typewriter long enough to put a sentence to paper. He didn’t just write gonzo, he lived gonzo.

In the mid-1980s, it was my strange fortune to encounter Thompson by phone on a number of occasions. Initially, I was involved in co-writing a book in which Thompson was profiled. Our conversations were brief and mostly about fact-checking. A year or so later, however, I was assigned to track Thompson down for a Saturday Review magazine cover photo. “Cover of Saturday Review? Sure, I’d kill for that,” he said. And I believed him. But then he dodged my follow-up calls for weeks.

Finally, someone in his entourage called to say he would cooperate and that he was holed up at the Drake Hotel in New York under an assumed name. The name? The agent wasn’t sure. That was our problem. The photographer, being a resourceful sort, called the front desk and asked for “Mr. Raoul Duke,” Thompson’s Doonesberry alter ego. Contact! Thompson told the photographer that his “office hours” were from 2:00 to 4:00 — a.m! — and not to come back until then.

Using a fifth of Wild Turkey and the negotiating skills of a Grisham hero, the photographer finally got Thompson to pose for a startlingly closeup cover shot. Thompson hated the picture, and after the article came out he was quoted as saying he couldn’t say the word “Saturday” anymore without retching. We never had occasion to speak again.

In recent years, when I saw Thompson in photos or when I read his columns, it seemed to me he’d become something of a parody of himself. Running around stoned out of your mind is edgy stuff at 30; it loses its charm at 67. It also tends to lead to acts of anguished desperation, like shooting yourself and leaving your wife and son to find your shattered body. It was inevitable, I suppose, but sad, nonetheless. The man was a brilliant writer. He even wrote his own epitaph:

“… No explanation, no mix of words or music or memories can touch that sense of knowing that you were there and alive in that corner of time and the world. Whatever it meant. … There was a fantastic universal sense that whatever we were doing was right, that we were winning. And that, I think, was the handle — that sense of inevitable victory over the forces of Old and Evil. Not in any mean or military sense; we didn’t need that. Our energy would simply prevail. There was no point in fighting — on our side or theirs. We had all the momentum; we were riding the crest of a high and beautiful wave. …”

R.I.P, Duke.

(Bruce van Wyngarden is editor of the Flyer.)

Categories
Sports Sports Feature

FROM MY SEAT

BANNER YEARS

Due to a restrictive policy established by their landlords at FedExForum, the Memphis Tigers played their first 11 games in their new home with a dramatically reduced number of team banners hanging from the rafters. Banners representing the 1973 NCAA tournament runner-up, the 1985 NCAA Final Four squad, and the 2002 NIT champions were chosen from more than 30 that hung at The Pyramid (representing every NCAA tournament and NIT team in Tiger history). The banners were back in full force for the DePaul game January 27th, but the university’s selection of those three special clubs — even if forced by their landlord — had me considering their similarities. And while there are some powerful arguments for other squads (starting with Penny Hardaway’s 1992 regional finalists), you could make the case for these three clubs being the most significant — not the best, but most significant — in U of M history.

When Anthony Rice scored is 1,000th career point on January 29th at TCU, his achievement had the retro effect of placing that 2002 NIT team — for which Rice played as a freshman — in rare air, indeed, when it comes to Tiger basketball. That 2001-02 team can now be said to have dressed four players to reach 1,000 points for the U of M: Rice, Kelly Wise, Antonio Burks, and Earl Barron. (For some perspective, in more than 80 years of Memphis basketball, only 40 players have scored 1,000 career points, including Rodney Carney from this year’s squad. Keith Lee is the program’s alltime leader with 2,408.) Granted, this is evaluating a single season’s team based on a wider scope of achievement, but it’s a measure for comparing the overall quality of one special team with that of another. It’ll work today . . . and it’s debate fodder for your next basketball-related get-together.

How dare I compare an NIT outfit with the school’s fabled Final Four clubs? Keep an open mind, and consider:

The 1973 Tigers had three “Millennium Men,” with Larry Finch, Ronnie Robinson, and Bill Cook each reaching the magic point total of 1,000. Finch remains number three on the alltime charts (with 1,869 points) while Cook is seventh (1,629). The 1985 team, remarkably, has six members in the 1,000-point club: Lee, Andre Turner, Dwight Boyd, William Bedford, Vincent Askew, and Baskerville Holmes. Lee and Turner are each in the top 10. So in measuring pure scorers, the 2002 team (with Wise, the school’s eighth alltime leading scorer) plays second fiddle to the ‘85 bunch, but edges the 1973 team.

What about rebounders? Lee gives the ‘85 team a lift with his school-record 1,336 boards, but Wise checks in at third alltime with 1,075. It should be noted that Wise’s best single season on the glass — 363 in 2000-01 — is better than Lee’s top season (357 in 1983-84). The combination of Robinson and Larry Kenon — a one-year wonder who established a single-season rebound record (501) that still stands — gives the 1973 team honors in this category. But with Wise and big Chris Massie, the ‘02 team holds its own.

Each of these three groups received its share of laurels. The 1973 team had three players earn AP honorable mention All-America acclaim during their careers: Finch, Kenon, and Cook. Keith Lee was a first-team All-America in 1985, while that team’s Bedord and Turner would receive honorable mention in later years. And the 2002 team? Freshman sensation Dajuan Wagner — who set the school’s single-season scoring record with 762 points that year — was an honorable mention All-America, as was Burks two years later. The 1985 team had four players who would be named all-conference at least once (Lee, Turner, Bedford, and Askew) while the 2002 team also had four all-conference honorees (Wise, Wagner, Massie, and Burks). Lee was the 1985 Metro Conference Player of the Year. Burks was the 2004 Conference USA Player of the Year.

It’s in team achievement where the 2002 squad, quite obviously, falls short. The 1973 club had to win the Missouri Valley Conference just to qualify for the NCAA tournament. The 1985 team was one of only three in school history to win its conference’s regular season title and tournament championship. While the 2002 team won C-USA’s National Division, it lost in the conference tournament quarterfinals to a Houston team it should have handled, a loss that probably cost an otherwise terrific club a ticket to the Big Dance. Five wins later, the 2002 Memphis Tigers were crowned, ahem, NIT champions.

The 1972-73 Memphis State Tigers (final record: 24-6) were the most important team — regardless of sport — in this city’s history. The 1984-85 club (31-4) was a star-studded, dynamic bunch that captivated the national spotlight and prevented an all-Big East Final Four. As for the 2001-02 Tigers (27-9)? They’ll have to let history measure them with an appropriately placed asterisk, for teams that don’t make the NCAAs don’t even enter the discussion of “best ever.” It’s a sad reflection, though, when you consider the player Rice became, not to mention his running mates three years ago, from Burks and Wagner, to Wise, Massie, and Barron. (A footnote: Scooter McFadgon — a sophomore in 2002 who transferred the next year to Tennessee — is an All-SEC candidate as a senior in Knoxville.) If they didn’t belong among the country’s top 65 teams three years ago, it’s becoming apparent the 2002 Memphis Tigers did indeed earn a brighter spotlight in the FedExForum rafters.