The Canadian author is critical of the decision. The post The real reason why Bob Dylan won the Nobel Prize for Literature‚ according to Margaret Atwood first appeared on Far Out Magazine.

In 2023‚ there were numerous defeats for the pro-life movement and a growing sense that an adamant pro-life position could mean an end to a politician’s career. Ohio voters enshrined a right to abortion in the state’s constitution; Virginians elected a Democratic majority to the state legislature‚ effectively killing Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s proposed ban on abortions after 15 weeks; and voters in Kentucky reelected Gov. Andy Beshear over pro-life Attorney General Daniel Cameron. But the pro-life movement is undeterred‚ and it is not backing down. On Friday‚ tens of thousands of pro-lifers from across the country flooded onto the National Mall to demand an end to abortion. Their commitment to the cause was shown in their defiance of the winter storm that blanketed Washington‚ D.C.‚ with more than three inches of snow on Friday. Many marchers traveled hundreds of miles on snowy roads to make it to the capital. A protester holds a megaphone during Jan. 19’s March for Life (The American Spectator) Pro-lifers chanted and waved signs‚ even when they got caught in bottlenecks because of the large size of the crowd and snow blew in their faces. Parish groups‚ religious orders‚ and Catholic student groups prayed the rosary and sang hymns while evangelicals prayed aloud and played worship music. A group beat a drum while chanting: “Everyone you know was once an embryo.” Pro-lifers built a pro-life snowman at the 2024 March for Life (The American Spectator) The annual March for Life stands as a testament to the persistence and devotion of pro-lifers to their pursuit of ending abortion. The tens of thousands of marchers serve as a reminder that the all-encompassing political priority of a major contingent in the country is ending the slaughter of unborn children in America. Pro-lifers march toward the Capitol during the 2024 March for Life in Washington‚ D.C. (The American Spectator) Even the New York Times recognized pro-lifers’ persistence in its coverage of this year’s march. “If the annual march has revealed anything over the years‚” it said‚ “it is that the anti-abortion movement is persistent and built for longevity.” The Times noted that crowds at the March for Life have not diminished following major setbacks for the movement‚ such as the election of Barack Obama in 2008 and cases at the Supreme Court that have been decided in favor of pro-abortion activists. Marchers head toward the Capitol during snowy conditions at the March for Life (The American Spectator) The March for Life’s rally showed that the movement has managed to win the attention and robust support of numerous politicians. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson delivered a speech strongly supportive of the anti-abortion cause. “Let’s be encouraged‚ let’s press on and hope that we can join together and make this great difference‚” he said. “We can stand with every woman for every child‚ and we can truly build a culture that cherishes and protects life.” He noted that he himself is “the product of an unplanned pregnancy” and said that he is “very profoundly grateful” his parents chose life. However‚ Johnson did not discuss legislation to limit or ban abortion at the federal level‚ which currently seems politically impossible. Johnson was joined by numerous GOP senators who proclaimed their adherence to the pro-life cause via a video. These included: Mississippi Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith‚ Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst‚ Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley‚ Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell‚ Indiana Sen. Todd Young‚ South Dakota Sen. John Thune‚ North Dakota Sen. John Hoeven‚ Kansas Sen. Roger Marshall‚ Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy‚ Texas Sen. Ted Cruz‚ North Carolina Sen. Ted Budd‚ Alabama Sen. Katie Britt‚ Wyoming Sen. John Barrasso‚ Florida Sen. Marco Rubio‚ Utah Sen. Mitt Romney‚ South Dakota Sen. Mike Rounds‚ North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis‚ Louisiana Sen. John Kennedy‚ Alabama Sen. Tommy Tuberville‚ Nebraska Sen. Pete Ricketts‚ Oklahoma Sen. Markwayne Mullin‚ and Oklahoma Sen. James Lankford. The firmness with which many of these senators delivered their message suggests that at least some of this large number of senators are genuinely committed to ending abortion because of their moral opposition to it. Even University of Michigan head football coach Jim Harbaugh‚ recently victorious in the College Football Playoff National Championship‚ spoke at the march — and he certainly will receive no accolades at his university for doing so. People display pro-life signs they made for the 2024 March for Life (The American Spectator) The pro-life movement has faced obstacles following the reversal of Roe v. Wade‚ but the movement is strong‚ and‚ if it exercises unwavering moral tenacity for the cause of life‚ it can wage an effective war on the abortion regime. READ MORE: Eleven States to Vote on Abortion in 2024 GOP Candidates Clash on Abortion: See How Their Views Compare Biden‚ Desperate for Abortion‚ Overreaches in Idaho The post March for Life Showcases Pro-Life Movement’s Strength Amid Setbacks appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Beleaguered mayors of blue cities might get some relief from the homelessness problems that nettle their cities. If they do‚ it will come from conservatives. Last week‚ the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review a court decision from Oregon that has handcuffed cities trying to remove homeless encampments. The city of Grants Pass‚ Ore.‚ a community of about 40‚000 in the southwestern part of the state‚ prohibited the homeless from sleeping in public while “using a blanket‚ pillow‚ or cardboard box for protection from the elements.” A district court ruled and a divided panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed in 2022‚ that such a law was tantamount to cruel and unusual punishment and violated the Eighth Amendment. That decision follows a precedent established in a 2018 ruling by the same circuit court that a municipality‚ Boise‚ Idaho‚ could not enforce anti-camping ordinances on public land unless sufficient beds were provided in shelters for the residents of the encampments. (READ MORE: Will Democrats Finally Address the Mental Health Crisis?) If the Court reverses Grants Pass v. Johnson‚ the former case‚ it would negate Martin v. City of Boise‚ the latter case‚ and give cities more leverage in dealing with a problem that is growing by the year. Conservatives to the Rescue in Blue Cities? Could it be that conservative justices will ride to the rescue of liberal politicians who can’t solve problems largely spawned by their own policies of utopian hyper-compassion? Or‚ as the Wall Street Journal put it: “Wouldn’t it be rich if conservative Justices rescue progressive cities from themselves?” The homelessness problem is particularly severe in the nine Western states that compose the Ninth Circuit. Indeed‚ 42 percent of all homeless individuals in the U.S. live in those states. California leads the nation by a long shot; with more than 145‚000 homeless‚ the Golden State accounts for about 35 percent of the nation’s homeless and more than half the people (52 percent) living on the street. Portland‚ Ore.‚ and Seattle also suffer acutely from the crisis. As the problem has worsened‚ cities have felt pressure to get tough on homelessness due to the steep costs they face in dealing with the issue and the failure of some localities to prioritize new housing construction. Given the limitations imposed by the courts‚ cities in the West have used creative measures to deal with the tent cities‚ like banning encampments in selected areas or at selected times of the day‚ or making camping a felony. (READ MORE: Washington Post Blames Conservatives for ‘Housing First’ Disaster) Last November‚ in compliance with a lawsuit filed by adjacent businesses and residents contending that a 15-block homeless encampment near downtown called “The Zone” was a public nuisance‚ the city of Phoenix cleared the camp‚ which numbered about 1‚000 individuals at its largest‚ from the street. Officials in Portland‚ Ore.‚ banned homeless camping on public property between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. The Missoula‚ Mont.‚ city council passed an emergency ordinance last year that made removing encampments‚ of which the city of 78‚000 has approximately 60‚ from parks used by groups like children much easier. In Los Angeles County‚ government officials occasionally brought in clean-up crews to remove lengthy stretches of homeless tents bordering freeways and elsewhere‚ and in the recent Los Angeles City mayoral race‚ candidates’ plans to reduce the city’s homelessness problem were a decisive factor in the election. San Francisco famously — or infamously — cleaned its city streets of the homeless and their feces in preparation for Chinese strongman Xi Jinping’s visit. Numerous blue cities have filed amicus briefs in Grants Pass‚ setting up a set-to with homeless advocates — progressives at odds with other progressives‚ in this case. San Francisco‚ Los Angeles‚ San Diego‚ Portland‚ Seattle‚ and Phoenix have all filed amicus briefs. They maintain that the present situation is untenable. Progressives v. Progressives The usual suspects‚ of course‚ disagree. The only thing Martin and Grants Pass means‚ Eric Tars‚ an attorney for the National Homeless Law Center‚ told Portland TV channel 8 (KGW)‚ is that “communities can’t punish people experiencing homelessness for undertaking basic survival activities – sleeping‚ sheltering themselves from the elements – if they don’t offer them an adequate alternative place to do those things. So the only reason that you would want to overturn that is if you want to be able to punish people for those activities without even bothering to have to offer an alternative.” The ACLU also weighed in after the Supreme Court granted certiorari to Grants Pass: Today’s decision could upend decades of established Supreme Court precedent‚ and reopen a definition of cruel and unusual punishment that protects Americans‚ housed and unhoused‚ from unconstitutional treatment in the criminal legal system. The Grants Pass case questions whether governments can jail people simply for the crime of being too poor to afford housing. But every blue city west of the Rockies seems to be pushing back against their erstwhile allies on the left. It seems that‚ after billions spent on idyllic plans to house at government expense everybody either down on his luck or sleeping on the street by volition‚ some on the left are finally waking up to reality. San Francisco‚ in its amicus brief‚ said the quiet part out loud: “In recent years‚ San Francisco has spent billions of dollars providing shelter and housing to persons experiencing homelessness‚ including over $672 million during the past fiscal year. But the City cannot feasibly provide shelter for everyone.” (READ MORE: The Destruction of the Family Was Not Inevitable) In 2020‚ Portland started a program to end homelessness in the region. Now it sees the light: “Even if cities could build enough shelters to house the entire homeless population—a budgetary impossibility for most cities—it is not clear even that would be enough.” In its brief‚ Seattle laid out the staggering dollar figures these Western cities have devoted to homelessness: Los Angeles — $1.3 billion in 2023–2024; San Francisco — $672 million in 2022–2023; Seattle — $153.7 million in 2023. It adds: “In the last four years‚ the State of California allocated $17.5B for homelessness responses.” A Taste of Reality The homelessness debate may be shifting. One columnist for the Seattle Times‚ Danny Westneat‚ has taken a more realistic approach to the debate. He wrote last September: I’ve been arguing in this space for more than a decade that Seattle’s approach is both too utopian (apartments for everyone) and too lowly (while we look for money and time to build the apartments‚ you can go live or die in wretched‚ dangerous conditions under this bridge). We should have stood up temporary‚ cheaper‚ emergency-style shelters — FEMA tents‚ tiny houses‚ tilt-ups — and then had a backbone about getting people into them. You can’t force anyone‚ and there’s no need to criminalize the issue. But you can say: “You can’t sleep here‚ in this park or on this sidewalk. You can sleep over there. Those are the Seattle rules.” We could still do this today. It would be a step to get many people up off the streets‚ hopefully‚ to start stabilizing their lives. It wouldn’t be utopian. It wouldn’t be permanent‚ or‚ unfortunately‚ universally effective. What it would be is doable. A Supreme Court comprised of a 6–3 conservative majority overturning the Grants Pass case would allow blue cities — blue cities with the sand and sanity to do so — to be more forceful in dealing with a homeless crisis much of their own making that threatens the quality of life in those largely beautiful locations. And‚ yes‚ it would be ironic. The post The Supreme Court Could Save Blue Cities From Their Own Idiocy appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

In 1968‚ President Lyndon Baines Johnson was saddled with poor approval ratings and a fraying Democratic coalition. Democratic Sen. Eugene McCarthy of Minnesota approached such prominent figures as George McGovern and Robert F. Kennedy (no‚ not that one) in search of someone to challenge the incumbent president for his party’s nomination‚ but‚ when no one was willing‚ he put himself forward. Johnson‚ who in his hubris did not even appear on the New Hampshire ballot‚ shockingly only defeated McCarthy in that year’s Democratic primary 50 percent to 42 percent. Though he prevailed off write-in votes‚ Johnson’s reelection campaign was fatally mauled. He would drop out before the end of the month.  READ MORE from Steven Kapustka: In New Hampshire‚ Nikki Haley Tries to Stop the Trump Steamroller Could history be repeating itself 56 years later? Minnesota Democratic Rep. Dean Phillips‚ who is challenging President Joe Biden for his party’s nomination‚ likely hopes so. And he may have some reason for optimism. For the Democrats‚ this year’s New Hampshire primary doesn’t matter‚ in strictly technical terms. The Democratic National Committee officially dethroned New Hampshire as its party’s first primary state‚ instead opting for South Carolina on Feb. 3. But the Granite State has elected to ignore the DNC’s rules and hold its primary as previously scheduled. As a result‚ the DNC has said it will not seat any New Hampshire delegates and will apply penalties to any candidates who appear on the ballot or otherwise campaign in that state. Biden‚ in keeping with the DNC rules‚ is neither campaigning in New Hampshire nor on the Jan. 23 primary ballot. Even so‚ supporters of Biden are‚ without his involvement or consent‚ running a clandestine campaign to get Democrats to write him in. While delegates may not be at stake‚ prestige is. Not only would a disappointing showing damage Biden‚ but it would also hurt the New Hampshire Democratic Party’s hopes of regaining recognition of their primary.  Phillips has turned the spurning of New Hampshire into his rallying cry. In a recent campaign ad‚ he compared Biden to Bigfoot‚ pointedly asking‚ “Why write him in when he’s written us off?” He also has reason to think he has momentum. In addition to picking up an endorsement from 2020 presidential candidate Andrew Yang‚ polling has shown him picking up an appreciable amount of support. An Emerson College poll taken Jan. 8–10 found Biden leading Phillips 49–16‚ with 27 of likely Democratic primary voters undecided. American Research Group found Phillips climbing higher‚ at 28 percent versus Biden’s 58 percent. While losing by 30 points in the state on which he’s staked everything won’t do much more for Phillips than it did for Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis‚ the former has more reason for optimism. Since the president won’t appear on the ballot and will need to be written in‚ it’s unclear how much of Biden’s support will actually materialize on Tuesday. That uncertainty means that a shockingly bad performance can’t be counted out. The post Could Dean Phillips Shock Biden on Tuesday? appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Edmund Burke‚ a central figure in conservative thought‚ is sometimes quoted as saying‚ “By gnawing through a dike‚ even a rat may drown a nation.” Burke understood the intricate connections between seemingly minor disruptions and the potentially damaging effects they could have on society if not adequately addressed. I wonder how he would react to a recent video taken in the depths of a New York City subway station. In the footage‚ an individual approaches what appears to be a homeless person‚ taking refuge under a sizable grey blanket. The clip has a peculiar‚ threatening quality‚ a foul ambiance‚ and an ominous menace. (READ MORE: Five Quick Things: Blue Cities Drown in Joe Biden’s Flood) The cameraman‚ attempting to rouse the homeless individual from his sleep‚ utters a sharp “Yo!” — and then‚ our anxieties materialize. Nearly 20 fat city rats scuttle from the grimy covering‚ racing towards the tracks before vanishing into the darkness. Here we have it‚ the complete encapsulation of progressive-run urban America in an 18-second TikTok video with over 8 million views. Is this what New Yorkers want: rats hibernating against the warm underbellies of society’s most vulnerable and shattered citizens? Of course not. (Kathleen Corradi‚ NYC Mayor Eric Adams’ recently appointed ‘rat czar‘ must be working overtime on this case. Or maybe not.) Painting New York As It Is Felt The decline began when the Giuliani/Bloomberg Pax New York era ended in 2013‚ paving the way for the hats-and-horns bacchanal of the Bill de Blasio clown menagerie. He immediately abolished stop-and-frisk‚ NYPD arrests plummeted‚ the city surrendered to incivility‚ and the criminal class began to operate like it was 1989 all over again. The decline continues under the Adams administration‚ and a turnaround seems unattainable. The American painter Georgia O’Keeffe once said‚ “One can’t paint New York as it is‚ but rather as it is felt.” Since 2014‚ the city has felt uneasy. Something is in the air — weed smoke. (That is the first thing you hear from visitors. “The place reeks like a Dead show!”) Then there is the rest of the atmosphere: the homeless (of course) and the migrants loitering‚ the turnstile jumping‚ the trash‚ the electric scooter fires‚ the now ubiquitous double-parked cars on fire hydrants‚ the optional nature of red lights and stop signs‚ and‚ of course‚ the shoplifting‚ the bail reform‚ and early-release programs. How would O’Keeffe have painted this dystopian milieu? Would she capture the sense of unconditional surrender to scofflaws? What colors would she use to communicate the casual and systemic disrespect the city seems to have toward its law-abiding citizens? Would her precise brushwork render the textures contributing to the aura of lawlessness and demoralization on the psyche of the city’s regular Joes? (READ MORE: AOC’s Leftist Sabotage Is Coming Home to Roost) To live and work in New York today is to navigate a constant white noise of casual lawlessness. Law-abiding citizens often feel like they are playing the mark in a two-bit street corner progressive shell game with no chance of winning. Their frustration is accurate and warranted; they don’t want to be a mark‚ a fool‚ a sucker. They’ve done everything right: saved money and paid their rent‚ taxes‚ student loans‚ and mortgages. They wake up in the morning‚ go to work‚ stay married‚ and raise their children. But they still feel exploited. Pursuing the path of righteousness often seems like a fool’s quest. This realization strikes when they’re forced to wait 10 minutes under the soul-crushing glare of CVS fluorescent lights until a rightly disgruntled 20-year-old temp worker unlocks the Plexiglass safe for the privilege of purchasing a 15-pack of Gillette Mach3 Razors for $49.95 while three masked kids make off with $999 worth of swag. The conscientious majority is sick and tired of this “progressive” policy shell game they’ve been forced to play. They feel devalued‚ knowing that the powers that be sympathize more with the rebels and rogue elements than with them. They understand that the game has no rules‚ pure Calvinball. If you protest and call for civility‚ you’ll be dismissed as a racist‚ retrograde‚ Bible-thumping reactionary bigot. Rather than being rewarded‚ you’ll be ridiculed for calling out the emperor’s nakedness. This soft censorship has normalized criminality‚ increased political and social resentment‚ and eroded standards of civil comportment. (READ MORE: United Airlines CEO Receives Backlash Over Drag Performance) Burke’s poignant warning and the disturbing video create a near-perfect metaphor for New York City’s recent decline. The rats‚ embodying the city’s soft-on-crime leftist policies‚ seek warmth from the body heat of the homeless man‚ who represents the victim class. When the truth is revealed‚ they hastily scurry into darkness‚ leaving the man to fend for himself‚ rendering him no better off‚ and leaving the average citizen disgruntled and demoralized. A necessary and proper reevaluation of these policies is crucial‚ as this disruption will only further intensify an already bifurcated city that seems to be run by the mischief of rats. Pete Connolly writes about culture‚ politics‚ and general chaos at Something More Than Paternity. His work suggests more thoughtfulness than he actually possesses. The post Welcome to New York. This Is What Dystopia Looks Like. appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Connecticut in the Movies: From Dream Houses to Dark Suburbia By Illeana Douglas (Lyons Press‚ 352 pages‚ $40) Hollywood has had a longstanding fascination with Connecticut‚ as evidenced by the more than 200 films set in that state. In her new book Connecticut in the Movies: From Dream Houses to Dark Suburbia‚ actress‚ film historian‚ and long-term Connecticut resident Illeana Douglas traces the history of those films‚ demonstrating how the depiction of the Constitution State on the silver screen has changed dramatically over the last century from that of a peaceful rustic refuge from New York City and the symbol of upward mobility to a suburban prison punctuated by conspicuous consumption‚ social conformity‚ and a proverbial winter of discontent. READ MORE: The American Spectator’s Conservative Counterculture Douglas‚ a granddaughter of actor Melvyn Douglas who was nominated for the Saturn Award for Best Supporting Actress for her role in the 1995 film To Die For‚ has thoroughly researched her subject matter. Connecticut in the Movies covers everything from silent films — like D.W. Griffith’s Way Down East (1920) — to true-crime-inspired productions — such as Everybody Wins (1990)‚ starring Nick Nolte and Debra Winger with a screenplay by playwright Arthur Miller‚ loosely based on the story of New Canaan teenager Peter Reilly‚ who was accused of murdering his mother. The production of Way Down East is a compelling illustration of the inherent riskiness of the early film-making days when there were no stunt doubles. While on location in Farmington‚ the film’s star‚ Lillian Gish‚ suggested that her long hair and her right hand both trail in the water as she drifted on an ice floe toward the falls‚ creating a vivid image that was later used in the film’s promotional materials. The legendary actress’s hand and hair froze while she was shooting the scene‚ and pieces of her hair broke off. She would experience problems with her right hand for the rest of her life. When Gish was interviewed years later about the small fee she received when she put her life in jeopardy‚ she responded‚ “We didn’t do it for money; we did it for love.” Connecticut has also served as the setting for many a holiday film‚ including Christmas in Connecticut (1945)‚ which stars Barbara Stanwyck as Elizabeth Lane‚ a single New York City magazine columnist who has created a fictional persona of a dedicated wife‚ mother‚ and gourmet cook with a country home in Connecticut. Elizabeth has been passing off as her own the recipes of her friend Felix Bassenak (Sydney Greenstreet)‚ a New York City chef. When returning war hero Jefferson Jones (Dennis Morgan) asks to experience a home-cooked Christmas meal in Connecticut with the celebrated columnist and her “family‚” Elizabeth‚ who knows she will be fired if her publisher and the public at large learn of her deception‚ quickly devises a scheme that involves borrowing a Connecticut home and a neighbor’s baby. The film was memorable not only for its salute to patriotism but also for its not-so-subtle message that now that the war was over‚ women should leave the workforce and focus on being wives and mothers. While Christmas in Connecticut reinforces the social mores of the late 1940s‚ its charm transcends its time stamp. If Elizabeth was a contemporary columnist‚ we would call her a social influencer. It is no surprise the film remains a holiday staple. The book’s subtitle‚ “From Dream Houses to Dark Suburbia‚” was inspired by the juxtaposition of two landmark Connecticut lifestyle films‚ Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House (1948) and The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit (1956). The former‚ based on Eric Hodgins’ novel of the same name‚ tells the story of Jim Blandings (Cary Grant)‚ an advertising executive‚ and his wife Muriel (Myrna Loy) who are motivated by a magazine advertisement promoting “Peaceful Connecticut” to vacate their tiny New York City apartment for Lansdale‚ Connecticut‚ a fictional town inspired by New Milford‚ a community conveniently located within commuting distance of New York City‚ where “the right people live.” The plot involves the Blandings’ being “swindled” by an unscrupulous realtor. Consequently‚ instead of renovating an existing farmhouse‚ they end up building an expensive new home. Hodgins‚ a vice president for Time Inc. in New York in the late 1940s‚ based his book on his personal experience renovating an old colonial house with 30 acres of land with his wife. The film adaptation boosted Connecticut as a desired luxury family community‚ and it also made history as one of the first films to have extensive product placement and merchandising tie-ins‚ with brands such as General Electric‚ Kellogg’s‚ and Ford featured prominently. (READ MORE: The Anti-Woke Reading List) The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit (1956)‚ based on Norwalk resident Sloan Wilson’s 1955 novel‚ can be seen as the cynical companion to Hodgins’ Mr. Blandings. Although Wilson and Hodgins shared not only their home state but their place of work‚ Hodgins tells a humorous story of a search for a better life‚ while Wilson exposes the dark underbelly of the suburban existence. In The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit‚ Tom Rath (Gregory Peck)‚ his wife Betsy (Jennifer Jones)‚ and their three children don’t see a happily ever after in their future; for the Raths‚ the Connecticut lifestyle is a burden‚ their house “a graveyard.” When Tom’s grandmother dies and leaves him her estate in South Bay‚ Tom and Betsy sell their home and move. The estate’s higher monthly expenses necessitate that Tom accept a higher-paying public relations job at the United Broadcasting Corporation. His first assignment is to write a speech about the nation’s growing mental health problem for the company’s president‚ Ralph Hopkins (Fredric March)‚ to deliver at a conference. This project evolves into a nightmare in which Tom is forced to rewrite the speech daily. He is also suffering from what we now call post-traumatic stress disorder and harboring guilt about a secret affair that he had during the war with an Italian woman named Maria‚ with whom he has an illegitimate son. While Jim Blandings enjoys creating advertising campaigns and slogans‚ Tom is frustrated by United Broadcasting’s office politics and its pressure-cooker environment. When he questions whether professional success is worth the personal sacrifice‚ Hopkins scolds him: “Big successful businesses are not built by men like you‚ nine-to-five and home and family.” Those same questions still resonate today‚ with the only difference that women now also commute to full-time jobs and navigate the same career-family dilemmas as men. When Ira Levin’s book The Stepford Wives (1972) was released‚ he claimed it was a satire of “robotic conformity in suburban Connecticut.” His intention was eclipsed by the public response to the 1975 film‚ which depicts the fictional Stepford community in which men secretly kill their wives and replace them with identical robots dressed in antebellum clothing. Many women saw the film as an overt rejection of the women’s movement‚ as it stoked one of their greatest fears: “Did men really want women to be equal partners in work and marriage? Or‚ given the option‚ would they prefer a malleable female programmed to care only about shopping‚ housework‚ and sex?” The fact that the women in Stepford have been forced to abandon their careers and the big city for life as perfectly coiffed and manicured homemakers not only undercuts the women’s movement but also makes a broader statement about the urban-to-suburban exodus: The suburbs‚ particularly the affluent ones in Connecticut‚ are the land where women sacrifice their independence and give up their dreams. Disinterest and self-involvement can also be a catalyst for tragedy‚ Douglas shows‚ and such is the case in The Ice Storm (1997)‚ which is based on Rick Moody’s 1994 novel of the same name. Set in 1973 in New Canaan‚ it tells the story of two affluent couples — Ben and Elena Hood (Kevin Kline and Joan Allen) and Jim and Janey Carver (Jamey Sheridan and Sigourney Weaver) — with intertwined lives: Ben and Janey are having an affair of which their respective spouses are feigning ignorance. The movie’s central activity takes place on Thanksgiving weekend on a night when an ice storm has infiltrated New Canaan. The Hoods and Carvers are attending a “key party‚” one of the potent symbols of the “liberated” 1970s‚ while their children are engaged in their own sexual experimentation games. While no one is paying attention‚ the Carver’s younger son Mikey (Elijiah Wood) wanders into the storm‚ and tragedy ensues. I have written about this film before for these pages‚ and every time I revisit its horrible denouement‚ I am reminded of how easy it is to get so wrapped up in our personal dramas that we forget what’s most important. This theme is replicated in another Westport-based film‚ The Land of Steady Habits (2018)‚ in which Anders Harris (Ben Mendelsohn) retires early from a finance career and divorces his wife Helene (Edie Falco). These recent decisions leave him at an emotional crossroads‚ and he starts exhibiting adolescent behavior‚ such as taking up with a stripper (Connie Britton) and getting high on a regular basis with Charlie Ashford (Charlie Tahan)‚ the teenage son of his neighbors Mitchell and Sophie Ashford (Michael Gaston and Elizabeth Marvel). Charlie ends up ingesting PCP-laced pot and dying from an accidental overdose. His death serves as a wake-up call to Anders and the Ashfords to reevaluate their priorities. Illeana Douglas is to be commended for vividly chronicling her state’s changing face on the silver screen. And while she certainly makes her argument for the dark vision of film‚ Connecticut in the Movies also includes plenty of upbeat movies‚ such as the 1988 coming of age film Mystic Pizza featuring a young Julia Roberts. I walked away with a new understanding of films that I had previously seen along with a desire to watch the ones new to me‚ and I highly recommend this thoughtful provocative examination to all. The post When the Suburban Dream Becomes a Nightmare: <;i>;Connecticut in the Movies<;/i>; appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Watch as Paul Kengor‚ editor of The American Spectator‚ joins AMERICA First with Sebastian Gorka to discuss fascism‚ communism‚ and the advent of a police state in the United States. Kengor and host Sebastian Gorka comment on the origin of the term “Nazi” and the far-left roots of the fascist regimes in Germany and Italy in the 20th century‚ as well as the weaponization of the term “fascism” against the Right‚ especially against former President Donald Trump. Watch the full interview to find out more. Read Paul Kengor’s latest work: The Martin Luther King Jr. That Liberals Hate WATCH MORE from The American Spectator: Paul Kengor Calls Out the Supreme Court Justices Who Failed Pro-Lifers R. Emmett Tyrrell‚ Jr. and C-SPAN’s Brian Lamb Reunite in Exclusive Interview INTERVIEW: Are Trump’s Poll Numbers Really So Surprising? The post The Left Is Weaponizing Fascism Against Trump appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.