38 Billion For Fireworks

“The principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale.” — Thomas Jefferson’s letter to John Taylor — 1816

On Friday night I watched part of the opening ceremony of the 2012 Summer Olympic Games from London. I did not watch the entire TV coverage as I just could not tolerate the constant interruptions from commercials and the steady stream of chatter from Matt Lauer and Meredith Vieira.

Two events did, however, catch my attention. One was the portrayal of British history and the other was the lighting of the Olympic Torch. Let me begin with the torch lighting first.

While a spectacular event with the burning copper leaves being elevated above the athletes I could not but wonder what the costs for these games are to the British people and what return will they get.

One thing that everyone can agree on is that hosting the Olympics costs a lot and it's getting more expensive all the time. However, there was little research into the wider economic impact of the Olympics until Montreal emerged from the 1976 games with a gaping deficit of $1.2 billion, an amount local residents are still paying off through a supplementary tax on tobacco. Those games were funded almost entirely through public city funds, and the large amounts of money spent on infrastructure improvements and facilities construction were focused on a relatively small part of the city. Montreal 1976 is widely held up as the example not to follow, and it caused many cities to think twice about bidding for future games.

The first Olympics to turn a profit were the summer games held in Los Angeles in 1984. Since local citizens voted against public financing, those games also became the first to be almost entirely privately funded. Los Angeles marked the beginnings of commercialization of the games and the development of Olympic sponsorship deals.

In 1984, organizational and economic strategies were introduced, under the leadership of Peter Ueberroth, which meant the city could hold magnificent games that wouldn't bankrupt the city 1984 showed that it was actually worthwhile to hold an Olympics. The Los Angeles Olympic Games resulted in a surplus of nearly $250 million. This was subsequently used to support youth and sports activities throughout the United States. Coincidentally, he was born on the day on which the founder of the modern Olympic Games, Baron Pierre de Coubertin, died.

Since then, the summer Olympics have made money or at least broken even, according to a report by PricewaterhouseCoopers. Seoul in 1988 was left with a positive balance of $556 million, Atlanta in 1996 and Sydney in 2000 each broke even.

The 1992 games in Barcelona only came out around $3 million ahead, but are held up as a good example of secondary benefits that a financially viable Olympics can bring to a city or region. The Spanish city got a massive makeover for the games: its transportation and telecommunications systems were upgraded; it got new housing and retail centers that are still flourishing 12 years later.

Germany's 1972 Munich games were similar. Although it emerged with a deficit, after the games Munich had a new subway system and much of the city had been renovated and rebuilt after suffering devastation from the bombings in WWII. The games also brought an image of respectability to the Bavarian city that was once the providence of the Nazi Party. The games also exposed the need for increased security. If done the right way, the games can bring a city many long-term benefits, as they did in Munich.

Analysts break up Olympics economics for a city into three phases: pre-game, game and post-game. During the first phase, the city can benefit from tourism and a boost in construction activity. During the games, there are Olympic jobs to be had, revenues from tickets, sponsor shops, etc., not to mention the masses of tourists that descend on hotels, restaurants and other local businesses.

It's when it's all over that the problems come. The challenge is to use all that infrastructure effectively and learn how to deal with the massive, sudden drop-off. Massive Olympic sports arenas often remain un- or underused. Olympic villages fall into disrepair and become headaches for the city. Most cities simply do not need all the facilities.

Even Sydney — which many Australians tout as an economic success story — has had day-after problems. Its huge Olympic Park stands mostly silent and empty, too big to be sustained by regular sporting events alone. It will require an investment of at least $20 million dollars to turn it into the "living precinct" its designers envision.

Analysts say the evidence is just not clear on whether hosting the Olympics will bring a city an important or lasting economic boost. Thanks to new funding strategies and revenue sources, the dark high-deficit days of Montreal will most likely remain in the past. But whether the boost gained by temporary job creation and intense publicity is long-lasting is more difficult to ascertain, say experts.

The final bill for the 2012 Olympics could be ten times higher than the original estimate, according to an investigation. The predicted cost of the games when London won the bid in 2005 was £2.37 billion ($3.7209 billion). That figure has now spiraled to more than £12 billion ($18.84 billion) and could reach as much as £24 billion ($37.7 billion), the Sky Sports investigation claims. The Olympics public sector funding package, which covers the building of the venues, security and policing, was upped to around £9.3 billion ($14.6 billion) in 2007.

The London Mail reported on January 27, 2012 that cost of Olympics to spiral to £24bn... TEN TIMES higher than 2005 estimate (and is it any wonder when we're forking out £335,000 for a single sculpture):

“But the three-month investigation, which used figures from freedom of information requests and public documents, revealed extra spends that could drive up the cost to taxpayers by an extra £2.4bn.

These include anti-doping control officers, legacy schemes, tube drivers being paid extra to work and local Olympic torch relay programmes.

The news comes as it was today revealed that £335,000 of taxpayers' money has been spent on a single sculpture for the games.

'Jurassic Stones' by Richard Harris, described as a 'row of stones on sticks' by locals, has been slammed as a waste of money after it went on display in Weymouth, Dorset.

Several locals to the town, which is hosting the sailing events for the games, took to internet forums to criticise the artwork.

One said: 'Government debt has just gone through the one trillion pounds barrier.

'Obviously deeper cuts still have to be made. May I suggest that they start with the Arts Budget.

….

The investigators say the final figure could exceed its £24bn estimate as many requests for information have been ignored.

Requests for information did reveal that Newham Council, which is staging most of the Games, are providing £40m of taxpayers' money towards the Olympic Stadium and £700,000 on Olympic projects.

However the council's legal bill over the row between West Ham and Spurs FC over the stadium has cost almost £1m.

It has also forked out £29,400 on tickets. In December Amyas Morse, head of the National Audit Office warned about the real risk of the Games going over budget. ‘Not everything is rosy,' he said.

'The Government is confident that there is money available to meet known risks, but in my view, the likelihood that the Games can still be funded within the existing £9.3billion public sector funding package is so finely balanced that there is a real risk more money will be needed.’

However a spokesman for the Department for Culture, Media and Sport spokesman today hit back at the Sky investigation saying: 'The Public Sector Funding Package for the Games is £9.3bn and includes all additional security, defence and public transport provision for the Games.”

In a sidebar the Mail reports of the rising costs of security stating:

“In December the head of the National Audit Office warned of the risk of the government exceeding its Olympics budget of £9.3billion.

This figure includes the build of the venues and the £600million police and security budget. The government has just allocated an extra £41million (with a £7million contingency) from this budget to Locog to pay for the Opening Ceremony, which is set to cost £81million total.

Locog has also been allocated £271m to pay for venue security. The figure also includes £2.8m for Games Time Testing, £35m to convert the stadium after the event and £35m for tourism campaigns.

However Sky Sports investigators drew figures from freedom of information requests and public documents to reveal the cost to the public purse could be as much as £24bn. Highlights of the investigation include the £766m cost of the land used for the venues. Legacy programmes are also set to hit £826m, while the Olympic Park Legacy Company is set to cost £300m.

Then there's the tube drivers who receive extra pay during the games. 13,000 of them will each get £500 each bringing that bill to £6.5m. And what about the quangos? UK Sport received a £29m injection from Andy Burnham in 2008 because of the Olympic Games. Sport England has used some of a £22million handout to measure Legacy work.

Transport for London spent £2.5million taking 30,000 staff on a tour of the Olympic Park, according to the Sky investigation. While so-called 'London Ambassadors' - who will meet and greet tourists, will cost: £3.5million.

It was also revealed that councils across Britain have spent nearly £11.4m on torch relay and other Olympic themed events. But not all local authorities responded to requests for information so this figure could be higher. Local councils have spent £407,102 on tickets.”

Mediaite reports that CNN host Piers Morgan appeared on CNN with Brooke Baldwin last Thursday where he talked about his interview with Mitt and Ann Romney. Prior to playing clips of the interview, Morgan was asked about Romney’s comments to NBC where he wondered if London was up to the security challenges that the Olympics will pose. The comments drew sharp criticism from some members of the British press corps. But Morgan shocked when he defended Romney’s comments saying that the presumptive Republican nominee was “absolutely right” to question whether the U.K. was ready for the Olympics:

“It’s no secret over here that for the last three weeks the security around the Olympics has been a shambles,” said Morgan. “The outside firm they got in to run it has been all over the place – they didn’t have enough people and the army had to be drafted in. So, Mitt Romney was only saying exactly what has been happening.”

“He’s run an Olympics, so I thought he was perfectly entitled to be critical,” Morgan continued. He said that the English press jumped on him because they wanted Romney to “talk us up a bit,” but the substance of Romney’s critique was on point.

“I thought it was a bit of a fuss about nothing,” said Morgan. “He was just speaking the truth which can sometimes be rather unpalatable.”

The BBC reported arrests in critical mass bike ride near Olympic Park during the opening ceremonies:

“More than 130 cyclists were arrested by police close to the Olympic Stadium on the opening night of the Games.

There were scuffles between police and cyclists on the outskirts of the Olympic Park at 22:30 BST on Friday.

People taking part in a monthly mass bike ride held in London said they were "kettled" near the stadium.

The police said cyclists ignored warnings and rode on Games Lanes ahead of the opening ceremony, but they did not respond to the kettling claim.

The Critical Mass ride is a pro-cycling event which takes place in London every month.

The Metropolitan Police said people were arrested under section 12 of the Public Order Act and for causing a public nuisance.

The force said two groups had been detained - the first on Bow Flyover and the other in Warton Road, Stratford.

The Met said up to 500 cyclists had gathered near Waterloo by 18:00 BST, five times the usual number that attended.

Police believed the demonstration "had the potential to cause serious disruption" and said officers used loud hailers and leaflets to explain the restrictions.”

The other thing that threw me was director Danny Boyles, tribute the Britain’s National Health Service during the opening pageant on British history.

Olympics opening ceremony London rehearsal

Regardless of futile attempts at liberal do-goodery, the goal on the left is always the same: constantly demanding undeserved praise for well-intentioned but failed acts of benevolent socialism. That sort of predictable imagery-before-reality mentality was on display during the London 2012 Summer Olympics opening ceremonies, where tribute was paid to the Brits' failing socialized National Health Service, affectionately known as the NHS.

Jeannie DeAngelis opines in American Thinker:

“The producer of the extravaganza, London resident and Oscar-winning director Danny Boyle, decided to integrate a choreographed tribute to the NHS into the showy opening festivities because, according to Boyle, "universal health care is one of the core values of British society" and an "amazing thing to celebrate."

Sounding as if he was reading off Barack Obama's teleprompter circa 2015, Danny Boyle also said, "One of the reasons we put the NHS in the show is that everyone is aware of how important the NHS is to everybody in this country. We believe, as a nation, in universal health care. It doesn't matter how poor you are, how rich you are; you will get treated."

Besides Slumdog Millionaire and Trainspotting, Boyle directed the movie Shallow Grave — a title more befitting the musical tribute to a health care system renowned for human suffering and premature death. Bleeding-heart Boyle said this about the NHS: "It is something that is very dear to people's hearts."

The NHS may be "dear to people's hearts," all right, but probably not to the hearts of those who've experienced the horror of a loved one dying after being forced by bureaucrats to wait months for life-saving tests and treatment.

The whole eerie performance with nurses from Great Ormond Street Children's Hospital (GOSH) dressed in 1950s uniforms pushing around sick children bouncing around on oversized hospital beds was almost as sickening to watch as Barack Obama emerging from the Styrofoam Greek columns at INVESCO Field.

Let's face it: in general, liberals are so proud of their accomplishments that to market their fantasy, they'd gladly don intricate costumes and push stage props around London's Olympic Park. The Brits did it at the Olympic opening ceremonies, and Barack Obama, harbinger of a similarly well-intentioned health care system that is similarly likely to fail, does it symbolically every time he promises the same type of medical quality and access that the NHS has proven for over 60 years is impossible to physically or financially maintain.

In an October 13, 2011 Mail Online article entitled "People are dying from lack of care. The NHS must be held to account," "realist" Julia Manning, chief executive of 2020Health, wrote, "Of course we have much to be proud of in the NHS, but complacency and sentimentality have no place in an NHS in which people are dying for lack of care." Julia, how about dancing Florence Nightingales? Do they have a place?

The truth is that while the NHS was sentimentally praising itself in front of the world, what the organization failed to mention was the minor detail that GOSH was the place where a 13-year-old boy named Arvind Jain died of malnutrition after waiting eight months for a complacent health care system to schedule a routine 30-minute procedure to insert a feeding tube into his stomach. After the boy's death, the NHS Health Service parliamentary ombudsman deemed that Arvind was "left to die in agony after 'chaotic and substandard' care."

…..

NHS detractors agree that although socialist-style health care may have laudable objectives, those objectives do not compensate for the appalling results. In 2009, it was reported that approximately 300 patients died each year of malnutrition in British hospital wards. The truth is that if the NHS wanted to commemorate an achievement, it should have been touting being the best at providing some of the worst health care on the planet.

Whether those merry dancing nurses realized it or not, they were representing a bankrupt system that relegates the very ill to waiting lists and denies drugs that are already paid for with the tax money of poor British citizens. What the nurses promoted was a system that has been known to refuse patients basic human needs like food and water, forces the sick to wait until it's too late for life-saving treatment, and effectively euthanizes 130,000 elderly people a year. Nonetheless, based on what the world witnessed at the Olympics opening ceremonies, the NHS accomplishes all those atrocities with a rollicking sense of national pride.

Like communism, socialism, Marxism, and the newest edition to the lineup, Obamanism, the British health care system obviously perceives itself as well-intentioned, which liberals worldwide obviously translate into ample justification for playing God with other people's lives.”

It just boggled my mind to see such a blatant display of left-wing politics displayed at the opening ceremonies of a so-called non-political event like the Olympics.

And then finally we have Jeannie DeAngelis blogging in American Thinker about the antics of our First Lady in Chief of Eating:

“When Michelle Obama jetted off to Britain to instruct the US Olympic Team on what they need to do to come home with the gold, it became apparent that America's first lady had found a way to party hearty, regardless of the pledge to forgo her annual Martha's Vineyard vacation.

Call me cynical, but just because Michelle Obama has well-cut biceps from doing 15-lb curls in the White House gym, trounced Ellen DeGeneres in a push-up contest, and kicked Jimmy Fallon's butt in a potato-sack race, that doesn't exactly qualify her to dole out pointers to seasoned Olympic athletes. But, then again, this is a woman who appointed herself Healthy Eating Czar while pretty much eating anything she damned well pleases.

For example, just prior to the Olympic opening ceremony at a reception held at Buckingham Palace, as "the Queen [of England] gave a welcoming speech" in front of 200 guests and dignitaries from all over the world, healthy eater Michelle enthusiastically wolfed down "Quail's egg canapés."

Meanwhile, back home Barack was concocting class warfare strategies while across the pond, resplendent in a $6,800 embroidered top and white pleated skirt from the J. Mendel 2013 collection, the first lady mingled with of 95 heads of state, including her "flexible" husband Barack's best Russian friend, Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev.”

So with the issue of security and final costs the people of the U.K. will have much to think about during the next two weeks. I wonder if their failing economy will be able to bear the final costs of the 2012 Olympic Games.

101 Gadgets that Changed the World

"I think we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious." — Thomas Jefferson

I enjoy lists. Lists like the top ten beers, the most watched TV shows or the best selling cars in the world. Many of these lists are compiled by trade magazines representing the items the lists refer to, i.e. beverage, entertainment and auto magazines.

The other night the History Channel had a program devoted to the 101 gadgets that changed the world. The list was compiled by Popular Mechanics Magazine. I was fascinated with some of the selection PM had included in their list. Here are a few selections that I thought were simple, yet I believe had a great impact on society and the way work, play and live. You can go through the list and make your choices for the “best” selections.

No.101 Duct Tape: NASA astronauts have used it to make repairs on the moon and in space. The MythBusters built a boat and held a car together with the stuff. Brookhaven National Laboratory fixed their particle accelerator with it. And enthusiasts have used it to make prom dresses and wallets. You might say it's a material, not a gadget, but trust us: Duct tape is the ultimate multitool. I can’t tell you how many times I have used duct tape. I have used it repair cars and household items. I is inexpensive and I always carry a roll in my car and suitcase when I travel.

No. 99 the Stapler: The first known stapler was handmade in the 18th century in France for King Louis XV. Each staple was inscribed with the insignia of the royal court, as required. The growing uses of paper in the 19th century created a demand for an efficient paper fastener.

In 1866, George McGill received U.S. patent 56,587 for a small, bendable brass paper fastener that was a precursor to the modern staple. In 1867, he received U.S. patent 67,665 for a press to insert the fastener into paper. He showed his invention at the 1876 Centennial Exhibition in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and continued to work on these and other various paper fasteners through the 1880s. In 1868 a patent was also taken out for a stapler in England by C.H.Gould. As well, also in 1868, Albert Kletzker of St Louis, MO patented a device to staple paper.

No matter the color or size the stapler is one of the most “can’t do without” tolls of the office. It replaced those pesky paper clips that always rusted and stained your documents. Of course its companion tool, the staple remover is a must tool if you want to save your fingernails. The stapler was so popular the largest office supply store in the world borrowed its name. Today we use all sorts of staplers: heavy duty, electric, industrial for construction and surgical staplers to stich you up.

No.94 the Blender: Stephen Poplawski invented the blender in 1922, but his name is not the one most often associated with the gadget. That honor belongs to Fred Waring — an orchestra leader in Pennsylvania who, in 1936, offered financial backing to a tinkerer named Frederick Osius who was developing a similar invention. One reason for Waring's interest: He could use Osius's gadget to puree raw vegetables for the ulcer diet his doctors prescribed. The Waring Blender debuted in 1937 and cost $29.75; ($470 in today’s dollars).by 1954 one million of the devices had been sold. It was a gadget for the rich, but with completion and manufacturing techniques you can buy a simple blender for under $40 today at Wall-Mary or Target.

No. 90 the Zippo Lighter: Almost every soldier or sailor in WWII had a Zippo lighter. The Zippo, that stalwart status symbol of the smoky second half of the 20th century, was born in 1932 in the most inauspicious of settings: a rented room over the Rickerson and Pryde auto shop in tiny Bradford, Penn. Equipped with a kitchen hotplate for soldering, a used welding kit, and a punch press, founder George Blaisdell and two employees went to work. In the first month of production, January 1933, they produced 82 lighters. In February, output jumped to 367. By 2006, the total number of Zippo lighters surpassed 425 million lighters.

Today you can get a custom Zippo emblazoned with the emblem of your military unit, your company logo or favorite sports team. These lighters make great give-away marketing items. There are even butane versions on the market today.

No. 88 the Flash Drive: Boy is this one is a gem. Toshiba engineer Fujio Masuoka developed the concept of flash memory—so-called because the erasure process reminded a colleague of a camera flash—in the early 1980s. But the good ship flash drive needed a way to dock. Intel's Ajay Bhatt and his Universal Serial Bus (USB), which was introduced in 1996, provided part of the solution. But data still didn't travel well until 2000, when the first USB flash-drive stick, with 8 megabytes of storage, arrived.

These 8Mgb flash drives sold for around $60 dollars, but it didn’t take long for bigger and bigger drives to come on the market reducing the price. Today we have flash drives with capacities up to 32 Gigabytes and the 1Gig versions selling for under $10 dollars. These, like to Zippo make great give-away marketing items.

No. 85 Sunglasses: These most common of health and fashion accessories came on the market ten years after founding the Foster Grant plastic company in 1919 to make hair accessories for women. Sam Foster switched his focus to a new consumer product — sun-blocking eyewear. Targeting the throngs of beachgoers in Atlantic City, Foster started selling his wares — America's first mass-produced plastic lens sunglasses — at the Woolworth's on the oceanfront boardwalk. Foster's business boomed, prompting him to adopt the manufacturing technique known "injection molding" in 1934, which revolutionized American plastic production.

In 1936 Ray-Ban (founded by Bausch & Lomb) came out with their optical glass, green tinted versions. Unlike other sunglasses, Ray Ban Aviators classic style was created to deflect the sun’s glare and prevent light from hitting the eye. While their original design was meant to make an aviator’s job easier, their iconic design has withstood the test of time and is one of the most imitated brands on the market. Buying a Great Pair of Ray Ban Aviators History. The Ray Ban Aviator sunglasses have been around since the late 1930s. In fact, they were first released in 1936 but only for fighter pilots. They were not released for public consumption until 1938. Their designed was modeled after the goggles being sold to the military at that time. This was the beginning of what would later evolve into the Ray Ban Aviator Polarized upgrade. Their popularity stemmed from the media appearances of General Douglas MacArthur during World War II. He often wore Ray Ban Aviators and was photographed for many newspapers with them on. In my opinion these are the best sunglasses you can wear and I own two pair, one regular green and one polarized brown.

Since the introduction of the first sunglasses the industry blossomed with some of today’s fashion models selling for 3 or 4 hundred dollars. I’ll stick with my beloved Ray-Bans.

No. 83 the Toaster: People have been toasting bread since the days of the Holy Roman Empire; for a thousand years, the job was done by simply holding the bread over an open flame. In 1919, however, a plant mechanic in Stillwater, Minn., finally got fed up with the burnt toast in his company cafeteria. So, Charles Strite built a box that incorporated heating elements that browned both sides of the bread at once, a variable timer and springs to eject the bread. Originally intended for restaurants, the toaster is now in 90 percent of American homes; 12 million of the gadgets are sold annually.

No. 79 the Swiss Army Knife: Carl Elsener, a Swiss journeyman cutler, thought it was a disgrace that Swiss soldiers carried German-made knives. In 1890, he introduced the first Swiss Army Knife, the Modell 1980, which had a blade, an awl, a can opener and a screwdriver. Today you can get a Swiss Army Knife with a multitude of utility tools ranging from the traditional blade, awl and can opener to saws, pliers and scissors. There are two competing manufactures, Wenger and Victorinox. Wenger claims to be the “genuine” while Victorinox claims to be the “original” and was founded by Carl Elsener. You can tell the difference by the little Swiss flag emblem on the case. I have been to the Victorinox factory in Ibach, Switzerland and the visit was very rewarding — I purchased several Swiss Army Knives.

No. 78 The Can Opener: Canned food was invented for the British Navy in the early 1800s—but the modern can opener didn't come along until 1870, when American William Lyman created a simple device with a cutting wheel that rolls around the can's rim. Previously, can-opening instructions for British sailors read, "Cut round the top near the outer edge with a chisel and hammer." It is also claimed that Napoléon supplied his arm with canned food when they invaded Russia.

No. 74 The Safety Razor: King Camp Gillette did not invent the safety razor—that honor goes to the Kampfe Brothers, circa 1880--but his company, founded in 1901, quickly became the foremost name in facial hair removal. Advanced manufacturing methods, low prices and shrewd promotion— for example, Gillette arranged to have his safety razors issued to every American soldier during World War I — changed the practice of shaving from the exclusive domain of skilled barbers to an everyday act that any man could perform from the comfort of his own bathroom. And according to Gillette, his blade saved money and time, too. From the March 1918 issue of The Gillette Blade: "Every razor sold by the Gillette Company represents a saving of half an hour of time spent in a barber shop, without saying anything about the money paid for service and tips. With an approximate number of 10 million customers this would represent a saving of 10 million half-hours per day, or a saving of 5 million hours which might be devoted to study or labor and which represents 500,000 working days of the labor of 500,000 men constantly employed, which is nearly twice the number employed by the U.S. Steel Corporation, which at $3.00 per day represents a saving of $1,500,000 per day, or for a year of 300 days, a saving to the United States of labor equal to $450,000,000."

Today there are three major manufactures of safety razors, Gillette, Schick and BIC. Gillette and Schick compete for the higher end razors while BIC goes after those throw-away plastic ones. One thing Gillette discovered eary in the game was that could give the razor away and make money on the blades. Today’s you can pick up a Power Fusion razor for about seven bucks, but for replacement blade cartridges will cost you $20 dollars.

No. 71 The Kodak Carousel: Unveiled in 1961, it was not the first 35-mm slide projector--merely the best. Before the Carousel, projectors tended to be problematic machines. Other projectors at the time relied on temperamental mechanical parts to move the slide out of its stack and in front of the light, and jamming was a regular occurrence. According to Todd Gustavson, the George Eastman House's curator of technology, "The Carousel was the first projector to use that most dependable system of slide delivery: Gravity." But adman Don Draper put the Carousel's cultural impact best in his pitch to Kodak execs in an episode of the '60s-set show Mad Men: "This device isn't a spaceship, it's a time machine." He waxed poetic while clicking through images of his family life before it unraveled. "It lets us travel the way a child travels--around and around and back home again."

Thousands of architects, engineers, marketing professionals and family photo enthusiasts used the Kodak slide projector with a Carousel holding 40 or 80 slides for their presentations and boring family travel logs. How many of us have had to sit through an hour or so of blurred, overexposed, underexposed, out of focus and receptive 35mm slides of someone’s family vacation?

No. 66 The Tape Measure: The modern, spring-loaded tape measure was created by Alvin Fellows in 1868. Fellows' work improved upon an earlier model by encasing the tool in plastic and attaching it to a spring clip to lock the tape in place until its release. Yet despite the spring tape measure's timeless utilitarianism, it didn't start outselling the wooden yard stick until the 1940s; the gadget sped up construction during a major building boom: 14.1 million houses in a decade.

As a former surveyor I can’t tell you how valuable this little tool is. Today’s tape measures come in all sizes with dual scales in US and Metric markings. There even electric ones on the market.

No. 65 The Zipper: When inventor and farm implement salesman Whitcomb Judson unveiled his newly patented "clasp-locker" — which featured a central guide that hooked together the fastening clasps when pulled upward — at the 1893 Columbian Exposition in Chicago, the odd-looking and ungainly device failed to impress. The modern zipper didn't come about until the 1920s, when Goodyear put an improved version of the fastener on its Zipper galoshes.

Today we use zippers for almost everything from pants to suitcases. Many are now made of nylon and come in little tiny models to the large industrial types.

No. 59 The CD-ROM: The CD-ROM is a pre-pressed compact disc that contains data accessible to, but not writable by, a computer for data storage and music playback. The 1985 “Yellow Book” standard developed by Sony and Philips adapted the format to hold any form of binary data.

CD-ROMs are popularly used to distribute computer software, including video games and multimedia applications, though any data can be stored (up to the capacity limit of a disc). Some CDs hold both computer data and audio with the latter capable of being played on a CD player, while data (such as software or digital video) is only usable on a computer (such as ISO 9660 format PC CD-ROMs). These are called enhanced CDs.

It is claimed that the first music CDs were developed by Sony and were designed to contain enough space to play Beethoven’s ninth symphony as that was Sony’s chairman of the board’s favorite piece of music. Today the CD Rom has been replaced with the DVD, which can play you favorite movies.

No. 54 The Ball Point Pen: The Reynolds Rocket, America's first ballpoint pen, cost $12.50 when it went on sale at Gimbels in 1945. Adjusting for inflation, $12.50 in 1945 dollars equals about $150 today. At $3.29 per dozen, that's 546 BIC pens.

I got my first ball point pen while in high school and paid for it with proceeds from my paper route. I paid $10 dollars for it and it skipped, smeared and would leak in your pocket. Today there are hundreds of models of ball point pens ranging from a $0.19 BIC to a $200 Mont Blanc. They all write the same.

No. 47 The Leatherman Tool: Invented in 1983 by Tim Leatherman, the Pocket Survival Tool (PST) has 14 tools, including a can opener, pliers, a file and four screwdrivers. Today, the Leatherman Surge features 21 tools. Even Victorinox makes the Swiss Army version. Everyone should have a Leatherman.

No. 45 The Sony Walkman: Sony's portable personal stereo pioneered the use of headphones. When the Walkman was introduced in Japan in 1979, Sony sold out the initial production run--30,000 units--in eight weeks. The gadget made its American debut in 1980 and became so ubiquitous that in 1986 the word "walkman" was added to the Oxford English Dictionary. By the time the line was retired in 2010, more than 220 million units had been sold.

No. 43 The Polaroid Camera: In 1943, Jennifer Land, 3, watched her father, Edwin, take photos: "Why can't I see the pictures now?" Her plea was answered in 1948, when Polaroid — the company her father headed — began selling instant film and cameras. It took 10 years and $250 million developing the iconic SX-70, which debuted in 1972. The expenditure nearly sank the firm, but by 1974 the camera was a hit: It spit out 1 billion prints that year.

For those old enough to remember you took the photo and its ejected from the camera. After a wait of about one minute you separated the two parts of the film leaving one as the photo and the other the throw away chemical sheet. Then you needed to rub some smelly stuff on the photos from the applicator that came with each package of film. Any place you went; to the beach, Disneyland or a National Park you would see hundreds of those black developing sheets in trash cans or lying about.

The photos were okay and there are no doubt thousands of scrapbooks and show boxes filled with these photos. Over the years the, camera, film and image got better and smelly stuff was no longer needed. Polaroid cameras are still in use today by people who want an instant hard copy photo for documentation purposes.

No. 41 The Pocket Calculator: Math nerds couldn't slip the first all-transistor calculator (1957) into their shirt pockets: The three-unit IBM 608 weighed 2400 pounds. Anyway, at $83,210, it was too pricey. By 1976, four-function pocket calculators weighed a few ounces and cost a few dollars.

I purchased my first electronic calculator in 1969. It was a Sharp with one storage memory and I paid $195 dollars ($1,200 in today’s dollars) for it. It was big, the battery did not last too long, but it beat the hell out of the slide rule I was using. Today you can pick up a pocket calculator for less than 3 dollars at a big box office store that does the same thing my $195 dollar behemoth did and its solar powered.

It did not take long for the pocket calculator to morph into the full function, programmable engineering, scientific and business models with more computing power than was onboard Apollo 13.

No. 40 The Wi-Fi Router: Since its introduction in 2000, Wi-Fi has made its way into more than 9000 devices, from phones to TVs. According to a Wi-Fi Alliance poll, 75 percent of young Americans say they would give up coffee before Wi-Fi. Almost every home with a cable or DSL Internet connection has a Wi-Fi router connected to their cable modem allowing distributed Internet access throughout the house. Now most hotels and motels advertise free Internet access by using Wi-Fi routers.

No. 36 The 8mm Camera: It's the most famous home movie in history: 486 frames that record on Kodachrome II safety film the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Abraham Zapruder had left his Bell & Howell 414PD Zoomatic camera (shown here) at home that day, but at his assistant's urging, he drove 14 miles round-trip to retrieve it. Each winding of the mechanical camera's mainspring lasts 30 seconds; the footage that became critical evidence in the Warren Commission's report on the assassination is 26 seconds long

I bought my first 8mm camera while in high school. It was a Bell and Howell with three lenses mounted on a rotating turret. Over the years I moved to Super-8mm and much more expensive cameras. I also got into the editing part of film making and have thousands of feet of movies film stored in reels.

No. 34 The Digital Camera: Logitech introduced the first consumer model, the Fotoman, in 1990. Because of its popularity and that of other models, Kodak retired its Kodachrome film format in 2009 after 74 years of service.

Today’s digital cameras come in all shapes, sizes and prices range from the $19.99 Wal-Mart special to the $6,000 Nikon D3s. They take great photos and many now take video. They have tuned millions of people into photographers and they no longer need show boxes. Now they just load up their PC hard drives with all of the images they take.

No. 32 The Computer Mouse: Initially, it was more like an elephant: The first trackball, which was invented by researchers in the Royal Canadian Navy in 1952, started life as a duckpin bowling ball. Other inventors created smaller prototypes, but it wasn't until Apple paired its Lisa computer with a small controller 31 years later that the mouse assumed the basic design it has retained for decades

No. 27 The Blackberry: In 1909, scientist and inventor Nikola Tesla wrote a piece for The New York Times — later quoted in Popular Mechanics — that essentially predicted the BlackBerry. "It will soon be possible to transmit wireless messages all over the world so simply that an individual can carry and operate his own apparatus," Tesla wrote. The BlackBerry was introduced in 1999; by 2009, 50 million of the devices had been sold. I am on my third model, the Torch.

No. 26 The Crescent Wrench: n 1907, the Crescent Tool Company was officially incorporated in Jamestown, N.Y., by Swedish emigrant Karl Peterson. It had one product--a wrench that could handle periodic brake and clutch adjustments on early automobiles, and replace an entire set of dedicated-size wrenches. Its popularity didn't end with car owners, however. After his historic transatlantic flight in 1927, Charles Lindbergh was quoted as saying he carried only "gasoline, sandwiches, a bottle of water, and a Crescent wrench and pliers."

No. 23 The Laptop Computer: In the age of the MacBook Air, a computer weighing more than a few pounds seems like a desktop. But the most successful early laptop was the 11-pound GRiD Compass 1101, a clamshell computer that went on sale in 1982. The gadget spurred innovation; today, 59 percent of U.S. adults own a desktop and 52 percent own a laptop. In the 18- to 34-year-old demo-graphic, seven in 10 are laptop owners.

Today’s laptop PC or MACs contain more computing power that all of NASA had during the moon launch program. When combined with Wi-Fi or phone modem Internet access the user has the ability to communicate with the world anywhere a cell phone will work.

No. 19 The Brownie Box Camera: Inexpensive and easy to operate, the Brownie was one of the first box cameras and brought the snapshot to the masses when it hit stores in 1900; 100,000 units sold that first year. Ansel Adams's parents gave one to their son during a 1916 trip to Yosemite National Park, when the future landscape photographer and environmentalist was 14. While setting up his first photo, Adams tumbled off a tree stump and inadvertently pressed the shutter. He rated the accidental image "one of my favorites from this, my first year of photography."

No. 17 The Handheld GPS: Before GPS was a road warrior's tool, it was the navigation system for actual U.S. military warriors. The government opened up GPS for civilian use in 1983, after the Soviets downed a Korean airliner in a no-fly zone. Magellan sold the first handheld unit in 1989, which believe it or not I helped them develop.

Today GPS is everywhere. It’s in your car, imbedded in your smart phone. Hikers and fishermen have small handheld units, you can get a wrist model for jogging and some camera makers, like Nikon, offer a small unit to attach to their higher end cameras for geo-tagging your photos.

No. 7 The Telephone: Alexander Graham Bell's interest in the education of deaf people-he began teaching at the Boston School for Deaf Mutes in 1871-led him to invent the microphone and, in 1876, the telephone, which he called the "electrical speech machine." In a 1912 issue of Popular Mechanics, Bell said, "To tell the truth, as a practical man, I did not quite believe it; as a theoretical man, I saw a speaking telephone by which we could have the means of transmitting speech and reproducing it in distant places. But it really seemed too good to be true, that one could possibly create, by the action of the voice itself, electrical impulses intense enough to serve any practical purpose." The device debuted at the Centennial Exhibition in Philadelphia in 1876, leading Brazilian Emperor Dom Pedro to exclaim: "My God, it talks!"

Just think of the Pandora’s Box Bell opened and the communications industry his invention created. We now have cell phones and texting (sexting in Anthony Weiner’s case) and the ability to interrupt people when they are eating their dinner.

No. 5 The Personal Computer: The forerunners of modern personal computers were introduced in the mid-1970s as kits. Little did pioneers like Bill Gates and Paul Allen, who wrote programming language for the MITS Altair 8800 kit, or Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak, who designed the skeletal Apple I, know what was in store. The Apple II, which debuted in 1977 with color graphics and an attachable floppy disk drive, ushered in a new technological era-and when IBM introduced its Personal Computer in 1981, the PC began its slow acceptance as a crucial business tool instead of merely a geeky toy. In 1983, there were 10 million personal computers in the U.S.; today 80 percent of American households have a notebook or PC, creating unprecedented levels of efficiency, capability, and access to news, music and entertainment.

No. 3 Television: The origins of television stretch back to the late 19th century, to a time before it was even technically feasible. In 1877, civil servant George Carey was already sketching drawings for a "selenium camera" that would allow people to "see by electricity;" at the same time, Thomas Edison and Alexander Graham Bell were theorizing about telephones that could transmit images along with sound. Modern television was demonstrated in 1939 at the New York World's Fair-and soon TV beamed dramatic images of the Civil Rights movement; political debate and casualties of war; astronauts, pop musicians, sports heroes and more directly into American living rooms. In 1949, fewer than 1 million U.S. households had a TV; four years later, that number had ballooned to 25 million. For a half-century, TV has stood as the No. 1 source for Americans' news and entertainment, and today, 99 percent of U.S. households have a TV. We spend an average of 2.8 hours per day watching them

No. 2: Radio: Police switchboards jammed. Drivers fled cities. Doctors volunteered to treat the injured. Why all the ruckus? On Oct. 30, 1938-the day before Halloween-Orson Welles presented a radio play he based on H.G. Wells' sci-fi novel The War of the Worlds. The Mercury Theatre on the Air presentation sounded like a news broadcast of a Martian invasion, complete with fake bulletins that interrupted dance music. The resulting hysteria dramatically revealed the power of gadget No. 2, the first instrument of instant mass communication. Patented in England in 1896 as "wireless telegraphy" by Guglielmo Marconi-who based his work on technology developed by Nikola Tesla-radios were in 80 percent of U.S. homes by the time those aliens landed in New Jersey.

No. 1: Mobile/Smartphone: With origins tracing back to Finland and Japan in the '70s, mobile phones have fast become the most widely used gadgets in the world. The first billion units sold in 20 years, the second billion in four and the third billion in two. By the end of 2010, the subscription rate stood at 5 billion, or 75 percent of all people on earth. The technology leaped forward in 1983 with the Motorola DynaTAC 8000X, the first truly portable cellphone. The smartphone, with us since 2000, is now a pocket-size PC. Wireless and GPS — and multimedia-enabled, it facilitates instantaneous personal connections that make phone conversations seem like cave paintings. People of developing nations, even those without an electrical grid, can tap into the world's commerce and culture. After a scant 11 years of development, the device seems to have limitless potential.

Well, that’s my selections of the 101 gadgets that changed the world. I am sure you can go through the PM list and add or take away from my selections. The UK Independent published their own list of the 101 gadgets that changed the world and it’s a bit different than the popular Mechanics list. You can view their list by clicking here.

The one thing all of these gadgets have in common, however, is the industries and the millions of jobs they created. Each one began as a gadget, but ended up as a staple of society, something we cannot live without and not one of them was created by government or with government money. They are all products of the free market.

Some said items like the computer would cause the loss of thousands of jobs and TV would ruin the movie industry and Hollywood. This is like Obama spread his nonsense by saying the ATMs caused unemployment in the banking industry. Sure some bookkeepers and secretaries may have temporarily lost jobs due to the PC, but millions of others now had jobs in a new industry. The had jobs building the PCs, writing he software, selling he PCs and servicing them Whole departments within companies were created and called IT departments. Microsoft employs 77,000 people in Redmond, Washington and another 12,000 in Canada writing software for the PCs. As for Hollywood, they have never had it so good. They now make movies that go directly to DVD and they make more money on some of their films through the sale of DVDs and cable TV than from showing then in your local theater.

The human mind operating in a free market environment is the best thing we have going to build a prosperous society. Government intervention, regulations and restrictions imposed by the lobbying efforts of special interest groups are our worst economic enemy.

The Kennedys — The Miniseries

“Men are so simple and so much inclined to obey immediate needs that a deceiver will never lack victims for his deceptions”. — Niccolo Machiavelli

For years my wife and I have had a disagreement regarding movie critics. She never paid any attention to them while thought they might offer a service to the public by telling which movies not to waste our money on. Over the years I have come to take the view of my wife. Movie critics are useless. The films the rave about are usually dogs that the public won’t spend their money on while the films they pan are box office hits. Mel Gibson’s “the Passion of Christ” is one example, the critics hated it while the public flocked to see it.

Most film critics are frustrated people who could not make it in the production side of the movie business so they spend their time in dark theaters watching films and figuring out how they can get even with the creative people in Hollywood. The recently aired series on the Kennedys is the latest example of their bitterness.

The Kennedys is a television miniseries chronicling the lives of the Kennedy family and the tragedies it has suffered. It stars Greg Kinnear, Katie Holmes, Barry Pepper and Tom Wilkinson among others and is directed by Jon Cassar.

The Kennedys was originally set to be broadcast on History (Formerly known as the History Channel) in the United States. In January 2011, bowing to political pressure from the American left, History announced that it would not show the series. After various other broadcasters declined to pick up the miniseries (for similar reasons as the History channel), the U.S. rights were purchased by ReelzChannel, which premiered the first two episodes on April 3, 2011. The miniseries is set to premiere in the United Kingdom on April 7, and in Canada on April 19, 2011, both on the country's respective History networks.

Overview

Parts one and two interweave a series of flashbacks that follow the Kennedy family from Joseph Kennedy's appointment as Ambassador to the Court of St. James's in 1938, his resignation in 1940, Jack's service aboard PT-109, Joe Jr's death in Operation Aphrodite, Jack's successful run for Congress in 1946 and for Senate in 1952, his meeting and marriage to Jacqueline Bouvier and election to the United States Presidency in 1960. Along the way the personal relationships between various members of the Kennedy clan are explored, including the strain between Joe Sr and Bobby and Jack's infidelities.

Part three: The birth of John Jr. and Bobby's reluctance to be appointed Attorney General open part three. Joe prevails on Bobby to accept the post, where he clashes with FBI Chief J. Edgar Hoover. Jack faces the first test of his presidency with the failed Bay of Pigs Invasion, leading Joe to impress upon Bobby the importance of his role as his brother's advisor. Rose Kennedy commiserates with and offers advice to Jackie on the burdens of marriage to a powerful man. Hoover confronts the Kennedy brothers with photographs of Jack's dalliance with Judy Campbell, a woman with known ties to organized crime.

Part four opens in Chicago in pre-election 1960, with Joe seeking an alliance with Sam Giancana to secure Illinois for Jack. In the White House, the President faces increasing trouble from his Addison's disease, turning to Doctor Max Jacobson for amphetamine shots. Jackie struggles to balance her family with her role as First Lady and she too turns to Jacobson. Bobby gears up for his war on organized crime. Jack integrates the Secret Service Presidential Protective Division with the appointment of Abraham Bolden. Frank Sinatra tries to intercede with Joe on Giancana's behalf; Joe rebuffs him but still cautions Bobby. The administration monitors Soviet buildup on the border of East Berlin leading to the sealing of the border. After Hoover plays Bobby a wiretap of Giancana and Johnny Roselli implicating Joe in election fraud, the brothers cut Joe out of Jack's presidency.

Part five Escalating racial tensions in the summer of 1961 form the backdrop of episode five, which sees Jack turn to Vice-President Lyndon Johnson for help in handling the Southern Congressional delegation. Segregation presents further challenges to the Kennedy presidency when James Meredith tries to enroll in the whites-only University of Mississippi. An intransigent Governor Ross R. Barnett inflames the gathered mob, leading Jack to order out the Mississippi National Guard, culminating in the Ole Miss riot of 1962. Jackie grows more dependent on amphetamines, leading Jack to confront her and Jackie to confess her fears to him. Joe suffers a massive debilitating stroke. Caring for him leads Rose to recall her daughter Rosemary and her emotional problems, which led to Joe's decision to have Rosemary lobotomized in 1941.

Part six finds the Kennedy brothers facing the gravest threat to the world with the discovery of Soviet missile bases under construction in Cuba. The ensuing international crisis tests Jack to his limits. Even as he deals with the Soviets, Jack faces the possible loss of his marriage after Jackie is humiliated by his tryst with Mary Meyer.

Part seven of the miniseries shows the Jack and Jackie's loss of their newborn son, Patrick; the assassination of President Kennedy is dramatized.

Part eight — the final part of the mini-series depicts Bobby Kennedy blaming himself for the President's death; Bobby Kennedy's 1968 assassination is dramatized.

The Critics and the Censorship

The Kennedys has been the subject of negative responses from historians based on early scripts, including charges of historical inaccuracy and presenting an unflattering depiction of the titular family. On 16 February 2010 the website stopkennedysmears.com was registered by filmmaker Robert Greenwald as part of the critical and historian outcry against The Kennedys. On 24 February 2010 Dave Itzroff of The New York Times reported that historian David Talbot, whose recent book had been used as source material for the miniseries, had joined those preemptively criticizing The Kennedys. Ted Sorensen, former speech writer for JFK, described the script as a "character assassination". At the time of all of this criticism the miniseries had not even been cast. Of course Sorenson a life-long Kennedy loyalist would say this; after all he was one of David Halberstam’s “The Best and The Brightest”. The title refered to President John F. Kennedy's "whiz kids" – leaders of industry and academia brought into the Kennedy administration – whom Halberstam characterized as arrogantly insisting on "brilliant policies that defied common sense" in Vietnam, often against the advice of career US Department of State employees.

In an interview for The Los Angeles Times on 17 June 2010, Joel Surnow (Producer of 24) addressed the complaints, saying, "They looked at early drafts of script that don't even resemble the final draft. It was way too early for them to comment on it."

On 7 January 2011, History announced that it would not show The Kennedys in the United States, stating "this dramatic interpretation is not a fit for the History brand."

Michael Prupas, president of Muse Entertainment and executive producer of the miniseries, issued a statement on 10 January in which he addressed the claims of inaccuracies.

The decision of the History Channel not to broadcast the show was made long after the executives of the Channel as well as the Channel's resident historian (who is a Kennedy expert) had read and approved all of the scripts and viewed and approved all of the final cuts of all of the episodes. Furthermore, our Errors and Omissions Insurer's attorneys reviewed all the scripts and edited episodes — and they have cleared all of the episodes for broadcast.

Director Jon Cassar said at the January 2011 Television Critics Association gathering in Los Angeles that he believes that the reason why it is not to be shown by History and other U.S. broadcasters is because powerful people within the United States connected to the Kennedy family took exception to it and used their political and other influence to prevent it being shown.

Joel Surnow, the executive producer, attributed the cancellation to pressure exerted by the Kennedys on the board of History's owners, A&E Television Networks and The Walt Disney Company. Surnow stated: "It happened at the board level. I don’t want to mention anyone by name. It’s very simple to say that certain board members are friends with the Kennedys." Other reports pinpointed Kennedy family members Maria Shriver and Caroline Kennedy as the leaders of the campaign to ax the show, targeting Disney executive Anne Sweeney.

On 12 January Showtime passed on the U.S. broadcasting rights for The Kennedys. Two days later it was reported that DirecTV's The 101 Network was considering acquiring the miniseries. Ten days later, on 24 January 2011, it was announced that The 101 Network also passed on airing the show. On 1 February 2011 ReelzChannel acquired U.S. broadcast rights to The Kennedys and announced that they intend to show the miniseries between 3 and 10 April 2011.Other U.S. cable channels reported to have declined to acquire the miniseries are FX and Starz.

In the UK, History UK is scheduled to screen the miniseries beginning 7 April 2011. Tom Davidson, managing director of AETN-UK stated on the History website: "Securing the UK premiere of The Kennedys is a major coup for the History channel. Bringing to life the story of America’s most iconic family, the drama is a bold and epic account of the Kennedy dynasty and we are delighted that viewers in the UK will get to see it on History first."^[23] Writing in The Daily Telegraph, TV director Sebastian Doggart commented:

“This is an amazing example of double standards. How can AETN call the series “not a fit” for the US History Channel, but describe this “bold and epic account” as “a major coup” for the UK’s History channel? AETN has suggested that the reason is that the US History Channel is especially concerned about its historically truthful brand. So what is the channel broadcasting this Sunday night, in the same time-slot as The Kennedys over on Reelz? The answer: Ax Men, a reality show about loggers; and Swamp People, another reality show about alligator hunters.”

The Kennedy miniseries is just another example of how the left-wing media and politicians will go at any lengths to protect the image of their icons, especially when the portrayal is produced by a so called conservative producer. The Path to 9/11 is another example.

ABC advertised the involvement of the 9/11 Commission Chairman Thomas Kean as both a consultant and as a co-executive producer.

On August 21, 2008 Jeffery Ressner wrote in Politico; “Over the past few years, perhaps no film controversy has inspired more outrage from conservatives than the Walt Disney Company’s handling of the ambitious 2006 miniseries “The Path to 9/11.” In the wake of Michael Moore’s 2004 anti-Bush documentary “Fahrenheit 9/11” and the 2003 CBS biopic “The Reagans,” the Disney censorship fiasco has been a frequent bone of contention on right-wing blogs, AM talk radio and other media outlets. In addition to making cuts in its ABC-TV telefilm after complaints from political forces, the company also shelved plans for a subsequent DVD release.”

“The miniseries, a $40 million dramatization of events leading up to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, was set for its network debut when several members of President Bill Clinton’s administration, including former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger and Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, insisted that several scenes were inaccurate or fictitious, and Clinton himself demanded the program be corrected or pulled. Five Democratic senators even sent a letter to Disney CEO Bob Iger that appeared to threaten the company’s broadcast license over the issue. Edits were made, a disclaimer was added and the two-parter ran as originally scheduled, but there has never been a repeat showing and a DVD has never been released.”

“Now the imbroglio has been revived for a direct-to-video documentary called "Blocking 'The Path to 9/11'," produced by right-wing rabble-rouser David Bossie and directed by former radio host John Ziegler. On its surface, the new video is a fascinating piece of behind-the-scenes investigative work. But, like the original telefilm and its quashing by the Clinton camp, it is not without its own political intrigue. Indeed, "Blocking 'The Path to 9/11'" raises even more questions and adds its own set of disconnected dots to this broadcasting dilemma.”

“Adding to the complexities: “The Path to 9/11” filmmakers' backgrounds provided plenty of fodder for critics. The director, David Cunningham, is the son of a controversial Christian missionary leader whose organization had shown an interest in media and movies. The screenwriter, Cyrus Nowrasteh, had friends and associates, including Rush Limbaugh, who hate Bill Clinton with a passion. (Both Cunningham and Nowrasteh insist “Path to 9/11” had no political tilt, explaining its chronological narrative meant the first section included Clinton’s faults in stopping Al Qaeda while the second part held the Bush administration up for scrutiny.)”

I checked on Amazon and the DVD is yet to be released. This is how the Clintons and the Democrats protect their legacy — they use their political power to censor anything they do not like. As long as Hillary Clinton as presidential aspirations this DVD will never be released. I saw the Path to 9/11 and based on other information I had researched I found it to be factually correct, yet politically incorrect.

All the above is an aggregation of material from outside sources. I needed this to set the background for my comments on the Kennedy miniseries. Without this material I was fearful that the reader would not context for my following comments.

I viewed parts 1-6 of the miniseries twice and the final 2 chapters once. I found the performance by Barry Pepper (Bobby Kennedy), Katie Holmes (Jacqueline Kennedy) and Tom Wilkinson (Joe Kennedy Sr.) to be outstanding. Also Diana Hardcastle’s portrayal of Rose Kennedy as the devout Roman Catholic matriarch of the Kennedys was riveting. Her religious fanaticism and vengeful character reminded me of a relative I have with the same traits.

On November 8, 1960 I voted in my first presidential election and I cast my vote for John F. Kennedy. At the time I was 24 year-old living in Ohio and the product of the upbringing in family loyal to the Democratic Party. For the next 51 years I have followed the events surrounding the Kennedy family from the Cuban Missile Crisis to the death of Teddy Kennedy. I have lived through the Camelot myth, sexual misconduct, political machinations and criminal activities of the Kennedys. I have seen how their political power and money has propagated this myth for the past half century even to this day with the building of a $25 million dollar library in honor of Ted Kennedy.

While this miniseries does not delve into every detail of the Kennedy clan it does, however, present the viewer with a fairly accurate picture of the beginnings of their political power up to the assassination of John Kennedy.

The series opens with Joe Kennedy as the ambassador to the United Kingdom and his pro Hitler stand, something that has been known for years. It also shows the friction between Joe Jr. and John, Joe being more like his father while John was more the Roosevelt Democrat.

All through the series you can see the unusual relationship between Joe and Rose. It was Rose, the daughter of the powerful Boston Mayor John F. "Honey Fitz" Fitzgerald who advanced Joe’s political career and elevated him from a prohibition rum runner to the Ambassador to England.

Throughout the series the play between Jack and Bobby is shown. Bobby, constantly intimidated by his father, was loyal to his brother and would do almost anything to protect his image.

What also was portrayed in some detail was the Kennedy connection to the mafia in Chicago. The Joe Kennedy-Robert Daly-Sam Giancana connection. It is no secret that Daly brought in the Cook County vote for Kennedy — even to the extent of using dead people to vote. Honest researchers have proven that if Richard Nikon had pulled an Al Gore and demanded a recount of the Cook County vote he would have won the contest and Kennedy would have lost Illinois and the election. Instead Nixon declined to challenge the vote for fear of causing doubt in our electoral process.

After Kennedy’s assassination Mark Lane, in his conspiracy book Rush to Judgment posed a theory that the mafia was behind the assassination. His premise was that Bobby Kennedy, as Attorney General, was mounting a campaign against organized crime and striking fear into the hearts of the likes of Sam Giancana and Carlos Marcello, the crime boss of New Orleans. Lane’s theory (and the theories of others) goes; the mafia bosses wanted to get Bobby Kennedy out of the way by their tried and proven means of assassination, but believed this would only bring the wrath of John Kennedy so they decides to cut off the head of the snake thusly making Bobby Kennedy impotent in the Johnson administration, which did happen. Thankfully and prudently none of these theories were put forth in the miniseries. But, the tension between Bobby Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson was touched upon once again tarnishing the image of Camelot.

Both the Bay of Pigs and Cuban Missile Crisis were coved in the miniseries. Both were done factually and with as much detail as time would allow. Both crises have been dealt with in other dramatic presentations with the Cuban Missile Crisis (something I lived through) being portrayed in the film Thirteen Days. While the Bay of Pigs was planned by the CIA during the Eisenhower administration it was given final approval by Kennedy after being in office for three months.

The Cuban Missile Crisis was probably the best performance by President Kennedy beside of his massive tax cuts. It was a time when this nation came within minutes of going to war with the Soviet Union. At the time I was working for the California Division of Highways and ordered to keep my state vehicle filled with gasoline each night and be prepared to provide emergency services under orders from the governor.

A few of the sexual dalliances of John are shown and there is scene where Bobby goes to Los Angeles to tell Marlin Monroe that the affair with Jack is over. These sexual dalliances are known to Jacqueline and are the cause of several threatened actions for divorce. These are no doubt the things the Kennedy family does not with the public to see as they tarnish the Camelot image. Yet, they are well known to most serious Kennedy researchers.

Mark A. Perigard of the Boston Herald noted that there is no mention of Joseph P. Kennedy, Sr.'s children: the future Senator Ted Kennedy or Kathleen Cavendish, Marchioness of Hartington and that it feels as though you are watching "through the prism of the Fringe universe". Perigard found it to be "an absorbing, addictive drama, with some authentic performances" but not history.

I think Perigard is off the mark. While this eight hour portrayal of the Kennedy family is not a complete documentary on the family in my view it shows that these were people, as flawed as any family. One of the critics, Alessandra Stanley of The New York Times wrote a joint review of The Kennedys and of The Borgias which premiered the same day. In addressing the circumstances of the premiere she wrote, "There is something wonderfully Kennedyesque about a backroom campaign to discredit a series that claims the Kennedy White House had more than its share of backroom shenanigans." Stanley found the miniseries to be well made though at times cheesy but that its strongest point is Tom Wilkinson as Joseph Kennedy, whom she describes in tandem with Rodrigo Borgia as, "A ruthless, tyrannical striver [who] grasps for power, promoting his sons to establish his rule and cement his legacy “

If you followed the shenanigans and dalliances of the Kennedy’s for as long as I have you would find Stanley’s remarks to be to the point. After the assassination the books began coming exposing the Kennedy legacy. Some were thoughtful works while other were “tell-all” books that focused on the behind the scenes battles and jealousies. This is when the public, who were open minded and not worshipers of the Kennedys, began the see that Camelot was more like the Borgia Palace.

Authors like Ted Sorenson, who was a Kennedy speech writer, has been one of the leading apologists for the Kennedy administration. Others like William Manchester began opening the door to the Kennedy White House after the assassination.

I don’t know how many people will watch this miniseries, but if you like politics and history I recommend you view the eight-hour series and decide whether it is more fact than fiction.

You can view trailers of the Kennedy miniseries and get viewing schedules by clicking here. You can see the cast of characters with photos of the actors and the real people to see what a fine job the casting directors did by clicking here.