The Least Controversial Amendment by Gary Hainsworth

Aside from the Lame Duck Amendment (1933), the Third Amendment is probably the least controversial of the prevailing 27 amendments. Although if Texas Governor Greg Abbott and his call for a convention of states succeeds there could be nine new amendments making 36 amendments. Interestingly enough, the last amendment to be ratified, I.e. the 27th amendment, was originally the second of two rejected amendments (out of twelve approved by the Senate) which failed to make into the final version of the Bill of Rights (1789)1, which took effect on December 15, 1791 after Virginia became the last state to ratify the proposed amendments known collectively as the Bill of Rights. Had this amendment been ratified when the others were ratified, the future 27th Amendment would have been the Second Amendment instead of the right to bear arms. In addition, the Third Amendment would have been the Fifth Amendment. However, things did not go according to plan. The first two proposed amendments in the omnibus of twelve proposed by James Madison were rejected but the last ten amendments were accepted. In other words, the last ten amendments of the Bill of Rights became the first ten amendments of the U.S Constitution.2 

The Third Amendment to the Constitution, I.e. “No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.”, rarely gets invoked in the Supreme Court. Unlike, the more familiar First or Fourteenth Amendments, which seem to be continually interpreted and reinterpreted by past, present and future courts, the Third Amendment rarely gets invoked but under extraordinary circumstances. To put things into perspective, the first and last time (since the 1700s) that the Third Amendment was invoked by a federal court was in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit court case Engblom v. Carey (1982). The issue was in regards to the housing of National Guard members employed during a strike by New York State correction officers . In other words, the 3 Third Amendment is generally not considered relevant. It could be argued that it is obsolete too. The Third Amendment appears to be a peculiar relic for and from a bygone era, the proverbial answer to a question no longer being asked: the quartering of British soldiers. The Third Amendment itself could be said to be a direct response to the Quartering Act of 1765 which permitted the British that soldiers from Great Britain be housed in American barracks and public houses (and not at the soldiers expense)4. Other than the economic hardships and implicitinvasion of privacies cause by the act, the Quartering Act of 1765 was considered a violation of the English Bill of Rights of 1689, which were held in high esteem.5

Works Cited

1= Buescher, John. 2016. "James Madison's Failed Amendments | Teachinghistory.Org".
2=(Buescher 2016)
3="Understanding the 3rd Amendment." http://constitution.laws.com/. Laws -- American History -- Constitution. Accessed February 09, 2016. http://tinyurl.com/zjygfa6 

4="The Quartering Act | History of American Revolution." The Quartering Act | History of American Revolution. Accessed February 09, 2016. http://www.bostonteapartyship.com/thequarteringact
5=Ibid.,

A Thought about The Success of Large Political Movements, Trigger Warning: I Talk About Sex by Gary Hainsworth

Whether you're on the left, right or hovering somewhere in between, there is something to keep in mind. The success of modern large political movements, whatever their stripe, will not survive for long if one of two conditions are not met: 1) You could get laid believing this stuff and advertising that you are a partisan of this whatever it is will make you more in than Flynn. 2) You will not be immediately and forever consigned to the your favorite hand or fingers by believing this whatever it is that's considering diabolical and letting others know that you believe it. In general, large movements won't last if they can't get their devotees laid or if it they can't even prevent their devotees from having a menage a moi that night because Jill discovered Jack liked Trump or Jack discovered Jill liked Bernie. Even in a red state, no one wants blue balls if they can avoid it. In other words, if your movement can create the impression that it's devotees might get laid or the very least, won't cause them to not get laid, you will have a better chance of surviving in the long run. Don't cock block your devotees. Even people in Red States don't want to have blue balls.

Not All Eschatological Predictions Made At The Paramus Holiday Inn Can Be Believed by Gary Hainsworth

On Saturday, February 13, 2016, the following meme was sent to me:

This meme was an excerpt from the paranormal/art history documentary called "Ghostbusters 2" (1989). In the same year that Bobby Brown was telling us his prerogative and Chicago was telling us to "Look Away" (but presumably buy their album), "Ghostbusters 2" was telling the world about the exact day that the world would end. In disbelief, yet resigned to my fate, I wrote the the following response to this meme and the original scene it was extracted from (I will provide a link to that scene on the bottom page). 

Here was my response to the news of the world's imminent demise, which we were warned about twenty-seven years ago (and ignored):

Since all information learned by aliens at the Paramus Holiday Inn are by definition accurate, I suppose that means we have about twenty-fours left on this planet. That the planet itself probably also only has about twenty-fours left. Well, it was a nice run while it lasted. Bummer. Happy Valentines Day.

I was convinced that we were all goners. Of course, I would. How could I not? It's conventional wisdom that any eschatological predictions made by an alien at the Paramus Holiday Inn, presumably the one near The Outlets at Bergen Town Center or the IKEA, about six miles from Teterboro Airport (if memory serves me right), are true. Unless the Ivan Reitman documentary written by Harold Ramis and Dan Aykroyd was referring to a different Holiday Inn in Paramus, New Jersey, which considering that Route 17 itself is about twenty-seven miles long, seems possible but I don't know for certain.

Before this morning proved that yesterday was not the end of the world because I am living in that tomorrow I thought would never come, I thought the validity of eschatological predictions made by aliens in the Paramus Holiday Inn were axiomatically true. Axiomatically true like Eulcid's Fifth Postulate, which President Lincoln in a 2012 movie whose title I can't recall because it's too long and has too many syllables, told us that "It's true because it works; has done and always will do". I thought something similar applied when it came to eschatological predictions by aliens at the Paramus Holiday Inn (or a room on the spaceship made up to look like a room at the Paramus Holiday Inn). I was wrong. I was very wrong, and I am man enough to admit that. 

Until today, I never would have questioned this Paramus theory or denied the validity of its most essential assumptions. In fact, I probably would have considered myself a blasphemer if I ever even entertained the doubt as to its legitimacy even as part of some ludicrous thought experiment. Now, having survived the Armageddon that was supposed to happen yesterday, I am forced to reconsider a theory which has always been a resolute conviction: that all eschatological predictions made by aliens at the Paramus Holiday Inn can be trusted. Now I know they cannot be assumed as anything suspect. I was wrong and I'll admit it. I wish there could have been a better way to learn this lesson. However, it is better to have learned the nullness of this hypothesis now than many, many years from now. Valentine's Day. Bummer. No. But for those who did believe, it kind of is because the end of the world didn't happen. Oh well.

© 2016 by Gary Hainsworth

Links:

Ghostbusters II - The End of The World is Feb. 14 2016

Ghostbusters II The End of The World is Feb. 14 2016

Thoughts About the Just Released Star Wars VIII Production Video by Gary Hainsworth

Today, the official Star Wars YouTube Channel released the following video: Star Wars VIII - Production Video (a link will be provided below).

This video, which really couldn't be classified as a teaser, is thirty-four seconds long. It will make you wish that there was a thirty-fifth second and angry that there isn't a thirty-sixth, thirty-seventh and so on. This video presumably features footage from the actual movie itself, but this factoid hasn't been confirmed yet. In addition, there is a brief glimpse of Rian Johnson (Brick (2005), Looper (2012), and some of the better episodes of "Breaking Bad" (2008-2013)) directing.

For fans of the Star Wars franchise these thirty-four seconds will have to suffice for sustenance until Disney/Lucasfilm releases another teaser: a one to three minute melange that will be used as fodder for countless explications until the next trailer after that comes along.

Although we'll have to wait just short of two years for any of those speculations to be verified or refuted, at least we won't have to wait three years. In addition, we'll also have a spin-off movie (Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (2016)) to look forward to. One which appears to have better production values than Caravan of Courage: An Ewok Adventure (1984) and Ewoks: The Battle for Endor (1985).

However, even with all of this in mind, with things in place to ease the two year interval between Episodes VII and Episode VIII, I still believe that two years is way too long a time for Rey to be standing there on that beautiful island, which is totally not Skellig Michael in Ireland, offering Luke Skywalker (who may or may not say "I am your father") Anakin's light saber.

Personally, I think that's a long time to be standing around for anything. Even if you are a Jedi wunderkind returning an Excalibur-like weapon to its presumptive owner, that's still a long time. Eventually her arm will get tired. She'll have to eat something. Poor Rey. Oh well, and then again, maybe that's part of the Jedi training process. Waiting around a long time like recruits for Project Mayhem when they waited outside "Jack"/Narrator's home for days despite continual discouragement.

© 2016 by Gary Hainsworth

Link:

Star Wars: Episode VIII Production Announcement

I Like Ike: Stephen Lang May Be Next Cable in Deadpool Sequel by Gary Hainsworth

There's an interesting rumor going around the internet grapevine, which I hope isn't just a rumor but something which will turn out to be a fact. Apparently, Stephen Lang, who played Colonel Miles Quaritch in "Avatar" (2009), wants to play Cable in an upcoming Deadpool sequel. The very same Cable and sequel promised to us by a robed Deadpool in the post-credit scene à la "Ferris Bueller's Day Off" (1986) of his eponymous film Deadpool (2016).

My response to all of this can be summed in two words: Yes, please. He would be perfect. Then again, Ron Perlman could work on account of being a bad ass, but the question is whether he would the right type of bad ass. It's also not clear if him ending up playing both Hellboy and Cable, I.e. some of the biggest baddasses in comic book movie adaptation history, in a single career would unravel the space-time continuum or not. For the universes sake, including the space-time continuum which science just proved is something that actually exists beyond the realm of hypothetical and probable. we better play it safe. I like the universe. It's where I keep my stuff.

So, my overall opinion is that I'm all for Stephen Lang. Does anyone else remember when he played Major General George E. Pickett in "Gettysburg". Does anyone else remember when Kurt Russel threatened to turn his noggin head into a head canoe in "Tombstone" (1993). Wyatt Earp most certainly didn't like Ike right then and there, but I like Ike right now; especially over the idea of him becoming Cable. 

Stephen Lang would make a good Cable.

© 2016 by Gary Hainsworth

There Is No "I" In "Team"...Good by Gary Hainsworth

In the word of business, teamwork -- as a virtue in of itself without regard to context, such as the talents and dispositions of the team -- has produced more mediocre products and services than any other force combined. The essence of teamwork is conformity, and the essence of conformity must, by its very nature, appeal to the lowest common denominator. In statistics, this sort of thing is called 'regression toward the mean'. However, I have also seen it called 'regression to the mean'. 

You might agree with this or you might not, and you might appreciate the rhetorical slight of hand or you might not, but keep one thing in mind: if someone ever tells you that there is no "I" in team. Remind them that there's an "I" in the word "intelligence". Remind them that there's an 'I' in "innovative". There is an "I" in independence. There is an "I" in "imagination". That there's an "I" in investigation. That there's an "I" in "Insight". That there's an "I" in "interesting". That there's an "I" in a lot of words that we respect.

A Theory About This Year's Game of Thrones by Gary Hainsworth

A theory, indulge me if you will:

Last year's season of Game of Thrones was all a dream. Jon Snow is fine. Pamela Barnes Ewing (Victoria Principal) will wake up, head to the bathroom where the water's running and see Bobby Ewing in the shower. Perhaps this Bobby Ewing will be Patrick Duffy or Kit Harington instead. 

Either that, or the whole series, all six seasons of wonderful writing, acting, directing, editing and so on, will turn out to have been some elaborate dream up by an autistic child named Tommy Westphall who spends his time looking into at a snow globe. Perhaps, that is what is truly meant by "winter is coming. Inside that snow globe, it is always winter.

© 2016 by Gary Hainsworth