"Taken," Starring Liam Neeson (Don't Take your Mother to This One)

“Taken” is a movie about a former CIA operative (a “preventer”) who ransacks Paris in order to find his daughter, a 17-year-old American girl abducted into the sex trade by Eastern Europeans. Directed by Pierre Morel and starring Liam Neeson, “Taken” blends Bourne-esque intrigue and European settings with the very, very, very efficient violence of well-trained and highly vengeful father. Nieson surprised me in this role. Not only does he convincingly play a humbled man trying his best to reconnect with his daughter after years of lonely field work, but he adeptly pulls off the role of a former CIA man, backing it with flair, wit, and the American indifference we expect of anyone senselessly killing whoever hurt his daughter.

Do not go into this movie expecting loads of character development or stunning dialogue because like all recent George Lucas films you will get neither. However, if you are a fan of action, violent catharsis (Neeson literally kills everyone to was involved in the plot to kidnap his daughter), and an American who destroys as much of Paris as he can, then this movie is for you. Overall, I must admit that I like it. It is entertaining and believable. I found myself rooting for Nieson’s character the entire time.

How I Met Your Mother (TV)

How I Met Your Mother is a show that has been around for several seasons but hasn't receive as much attention as it deserves. It is very funny while still injecting serious themes that help make the show both entertaining and meaningful (but not THAT meaningful, it's still TV).

The show's main character Ted (Josh Radnor) is searching for a wife because his best friend Marshall (Jason Segel) just proposed to his long-time wife Lilly(Alyson Hannigan). The search is made interesting by his friends Barney's (Neil Harris) unique dating philosophy and approach to life.

In some way this show compares to Friends but with a younger cast and a narrower theme. And, unlike Friends, there are scenes (though not the norm) that are almost brilliant and the non-brilliant content is is generally very enjoyable. See a good scene below:

Why So Wastefull?

Economists for decades have warned against the dangers of big government but the closed-minded liberal establishment still fails to see the futility of increasing the size of government as a means for economic growth. The reason? They do not want to see the truth. Liberals depend on government spending to feed their constituents who in tern support them politically.

Take labor unions. Protectionism is without question one of the worst things for any economy yet the Democratic party for years has pushed for higher trade tariffs and fight free trade agreements. They do this because in elections, unions uniformly vote, fund raise and campaign for Democrats.

Politicians, like private economics actors, seek their self-interest. The Republicans are no exception to this. However, the Republicans economic policies ignore special interest because they have no hope of gaining labor union and other groups support. Instead, they support bills that increase the common good for the U.S. economy (with the exception of many Bush spending bills, Bush was a liberal).

I fully admit to be a Republican but that does not discredit my argument. The Democrat's economic policy are narrow and wasteful while the Republicans economic agenda is designed to benefit the country as a whole.

Need proof? Read the current Senate or House version of the "economic stimulus" bill and decide how much of it will actually fix the economy.

Springsteen at the Superbowl

I feel like a spurned lover.

Last night Bruce Springsteen played the Superbowl halftime show. He played "10th Avenue Freeze Out," "Born to Run," "Working on a Dream," and "Glory Days." While filled with the Boss's signature energy and stage magic (including an awkward slide into the stage camera), the performance might have represented the end of era for Bruce Springsteen: the era of independent, Man-fighting rock n' roll righteousness. To see him on television axing for a nation that only knows three of his songs broke my heart. The Superbowl has come to represent all things popular, yuppie, and middle/upper class. Why, oh why, would the voice of rock n' roll purity, the man who gave soul to the working class in the 1970s and true coolness in the 80s, 90s, and 2000s, play a venue that will encourage 14 year-old girls to download his ringtone today? It seems as if instead of remembering his core fans (the men and women of America's hardknock cities and towns; think Cleveland, Newark, Detroit, etc.), he has opted to give his music filled with words for those born in "deadman's town[s]" to folks who will think that losing their 401K or their Jaguar equate to life kicking them in the junk.

Some might say that by agreeing to perform in the Superbowl in America's hour of need he has reached out to an America hurting the way it was when his "Born to Run" and "Born in the USA" albums debuted. Maybe these folks will say that by playing at the Superbowl, Springsteen garnered a pulpit for himself that reached the maximum number of his core fans. If that is true, then answer me this: why have Springsteen's ticket prices ($139 a pop) risen to the point where they now exclude those folks who made him great?

I apologize if my words are out of line. But I speak as a Cleveland native who grew up hearing from friends, family, and the ever-present radio that true freedom lies in living life with the abandon that Springsteen's music represents. Hopefully the Boss's night hooking up with pop culture is just a one night stand. Hopefully he will press on and continue to produce music that speaks to the soulful wanderer in all of us - the teenager deep down inside who wants to grab his motorcycle and leather jacket and ride through the chilly summer air.