Everything I ever needed to know, I learned from Willy

There aren’t many necessities that we human beings would die without.

Stories abound of how survivors who were lost or injured in the savage wilderness got by for days (and sometimes even weeks) on a small amount of water from a trickling stream or by carefully rationing the contents of small canteen.

Of course there’s also oxygen, protection from the elements, and a minimum amount of caloric food intake.

Psychologists and religious leaders will expound upon the notion that human beings — in the absence of love, caring, and affection — will keel over dead.

But all of these are insignificant, miniscule, even trivial, in relation to the lifeblood of mankind, the Nectar of the Gods — that’s right — chocolate.

Without chocolat, Schoki, chokolade, suklaa — whatever language you prefer — life has no meaning (or at least it’s pretty boring). In the pursuit of cacao confectionery bliss, wars have been fought, fortunes made and lost, new planets explored, and vast civilizations obliterated. (OK, that’s a little over the top, but you get the picture.)

As a boy, I always thought it was weird that men gave women chocolate as gifts — I was utterly convinced that little snot-nosed lads consumed chocolate in much greater quantities (and with much greater appreciation) than girls ever would. 

Following Halloween, Easter, or Christmas candy hauls, my older sister, Kim, would hoard all of her booty under lock and key, and make it last seemingly for an eternity. Some of it might even go bad before she ate it (the outrage of it all). I just figured she didn’t like the stuff very much. Of course, my brother and I schemed and plotted to relieve her of as much of the “amber gold” as was humanly possible.

As I got older and wiser, I noticed all the ladies waiting in line at the See’s Candies counter to get their fix, and I learned a valuable lesson. Though men will often dispense with chocolate in favor of other, more manly vices, for many women, chocolate is a good as —or in many cases superior to — sex.

But I’m one of the few dudes secure enough in my masculinity to openly admit that chocolate makes my world go ‘round. A self-admitted chocoholic, it’s difficult for me to claw through a single day without even a morsel of my manna from heaven. Two days, a mass famine. Three days, Armegeddon — launch the nukes, game over.

On the Mish, one of my companions and I had a contest to see which of us could go longer without his vice nourishment of choice. For him, it was Coca-Cola, and for me it was that foil wrapped, made in West Germany (this was right before the Wall came down) milk chocolate goodness. We were half-way through baking a batch of chocolate chip cookies when he realized I had been sampling the dough—busted! I think we were at our two-day abstinence mark.

But truth be told, all chocolate is not created equal. Far from it, actually.

Swiss and German chocolatiers are the best. You can’t go wrong with Lindt, Toberlone, or Milka. Norway and Sweden do some nice stuff with their Freia and Marabou brands. A few British chocolate labels are worthy of mention, such as Cadbury, and France has some players too. Northern Europeans in particular love hazel nuts in their chocolate — a dream combination much better than almonds or peanuts.

But you’ve got to be careful with European imports — they like to put a nasty-tasting nut paste called marzipan in their chocolate and are have often been sitting on the shelf for way too long. 

American chocolate, in large part, is highly inferior. Hershey is chalky on the palette, and most U.S. brands are so filled with nougat and other lousy fillers, there isn’t much actual chocolate to speak of any way. I can’t stomach the cheap brands at Wal-Mart and other grocers, like the much detested Palmer.

My personal indigenous favorites are Baby Ruth, Kit Kat, and Snickers. Up a level or two front the check-out counters at Albertsons, and based out of San Francisco, See’s Candies offers a classy blend of quality and value. It’s hard to beat their milk chocolate, caramel (and don't pronounce it "kara melle" or I'll slug you) and pecan clusters.

I don’t do white chocolate (it isn’t really chocolate) and I haven’t gotten advanced enough in years to where dark chocolate appeals to me.

Now, where was it I put my bag of Cadbury Mini Eggs?

Beware of old Bears coming out of hibernation

Russia’s UN ambassador is full of crap — but that’s his job.

Vitaly Churkin, the Russian Federation’s ambassador to the United Nations, spoke Monday at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah. 

He kicked off his remarks with a cursory whitewashed foreign policy history of the Russian state, benignly dubbing the bloody 1917 Communist revolution into a draconian dictatorship as its “socialist” revolution. Lenin and his commie cronies ruthlessly executed the royalty and millions of the Russian people who didn’t agree with their twisted Marxist philosophies.

Churkin also mentioned Russia’s (The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics’s) significant role in World War II. While it’s true Russia paid more sacrifices than any nation in WWII — 27 million Russian dead attest to that — our charming diplomat failed to mention that Joseph Stalin rivaled even Nazi Germany’s Adolf Hitler in the scale and scope of his war crimes and human atrocities. Stalin, with his political and military purges in the 1930s and Russians troops-as-human cannon fodder style of waging war, had millions upon millions of his own people executed and murdered for the sake of his own political expediency.

And we call Hitler a monster?

Churkin applauded Russia’s role in nuclear arms reductions efforts by the world’s two super powers beginning in the 1970s (I’m cool with that) but went so far as to take credit for the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989.

When Russia launched a military invasion of the independent democratic state of Georgia, and its breakaway republic, South Ossetia, last August, Churkin coined the shameless geopolitical power grab something akin to a humanitarian aid effort.

Now I know Churkin is a diplomat and his chief duty is to be a spinmeister for Moscow, but come on. Really?

Listening to Churkin, one might foolishly believe that Russia has transformed itself (and its long history of aggressive, totalitarian ways) and become the most benevolent, democratic and free society on the planet. A giant Teddy bear, as it were, reaching out altruistically to embrace all nations of world with an olive branch, love and an impromptu rendition of “Kumbaya.”

He subtly bashed former President George W. Bush several times for acting unilaterally in American foreign policy despite the fact that Russia wrote the book over several centuries on taking advantage of and invading weaker countries (ask the former Soviet republics and Eastern Europe, stuck for forty years behind Stalin’s Iron Curtain), setting up puppet regimes in those countries, and silencing all democratic institutions and voices.

For years now, ex-KGB spy and Russian President Vladmir Putin has strangled democratic institutions and reforms born after the Soviet Union imploded in 1991. The Russian Legislature’s powers have been weakened, basic individual freedoms curtailed, free speech chilled, and central power consolidated under Prime Minister Putin and his new favorite Muppet, President Dmitry Medvedev.

With the Russia economy flourishing in recent years, Putin is rebuilding the Russian military and returning the country to a combative and aggressive stance more in line with the Soviet Union than a democratic republic committed to those ideals. 

He’s called Mother Russia’s loss of her vast network of satellite states in 1991 a “tragedy.” Hmm, extending freedom and liberation to previously independent states from totalitarian authority is a tragedy — interesting.

Remember when Putin recently sent its submarines to the North Pole to post Russian flags claiming the real estate as Russian Federation territory and any valuable mineral or oil deposits that lay under its frigid waters? Call me crazy, but I don’t think that was just for an arctic photo op.

And you thought the oppressive USSR and icy days of the Cold War were gone forever — stupid Yankee peacenik.

With the election of President Barack Obama, with his “touchy, feely” approach to foreign relations, Moscow is licking its chops because it knows an American leader who doesn’t stick to his guns (read: values), will be easily intimidated and appeased to accept Russian realpolitik.

Churkin said the prospect of more Eastern European nations joining the North Atlantic Treaty Organization makes Moscow “very uncomfortable,” and that a nation or nations cannot “strengthen their security at the expense of others”? Aww, let me extend America’s sincerest apologies.

What kind of ridiculous diplomatic double-speak is that? That’s the very definition of foreign security policy that all states engage in, working to notch up their security position vis-a-vis that of its neighbors and potential threats.

Besides, shouldn’t a decision to join NATO be up to Bulgaria, Ukraine, or whatever nation has been extended that invitation, and not Moscow?

Russia doesn’t even believe a country has the right to defend itself against a nuclear missile strike, as is obvious with its condemnation of U.S. plans to implement a future antiballistic missile shield network in Europe.

I’m neither a conspiracy theorist nor suggesting that Putin is sitting in his recliner in the Kremlin plotting a vast nuclear Armageddon with America, or rolling his tanks back into Berlin.

But I am saying Russia’s actions in recent years speak louder than its rhetoric. 

Americans and Europeans and their leaders would be well advised to take notice of Putin’s neo-Sovietism.

Resistance isn’t futile — It’s a hoot

Can there be anything more disastrous in the world than the violently imposed regime of 10-digit dialing? I don’t think so.

As of March 1, everyone in Utah has to dial 10 digits, including the area code and seven-digit telephone number, to call his next-door neighbor to borrow an egg, invite him to a thinly disguised Amway ambush, or make an LDS Church home teaching appointment.

The Utah Public Service Commission, in its great bureaucratic wisdom, in July of 2007 adopted the “area code overlay” — yeah, sure, it SOUNDS innocuous. In a nutshell, it means rather than enact a geographic split of area codes for new numbers, they’ll just arbitrarily assign unsuspecting victims with the sexy sounding area code of 3-8-5. 

It appears we’ve run out of the theoretically limitless 801 combinations along the Wasatch Front.

I will not, cannot dial 10 digits. Not at home, not in my car, not with my spouse, nor in my parents’ house. 

Well, my parents live in Illinois, and that eliminates that problem — unless they too have 10-digit dialing, which is actually pretty likely given they live in the Democratic-controlled socialist utopian police state where our precious President Barack Obama used to proselyte.

You see, I recently began working from home and use a phone whose owner’s manual is long departed. I don’t have the foggiest on programming phone numbers into its memory, so I get to peck away with “every call I make, every cake I bake.”

I can’t count the number of times I’ve started to make a call and I get that lovely recording of a matronly woman baking pies who works for the phone company, “We’re sorry, your call cannot be completed as dialed ...” 

Grrrr. This is all a vast left-wing conspiracy, I tell you, a part of Obama’s plan for “Change,” — as in that’s all you and me will have left in our pockets when he’s done.

 

But have no fear — I am — even as you read this — founding an underground ACO (area code overlay) resistance/militia group devilishly yet impressively dubbed THACO (pronounced “taco”) — To Hell with the Area Code Overlay.

Though we will be completely unarmed and exercise orthodox Lutherian civil disobedience, we’ll still raise Cain and give the out-of-touch, Marxist-bent Utah Public Service Commission no other choice but to reverse their heinous crime against citizens of the Beehive State.

Dues are only $5 a month (and payable to me), meetings will be at the estate of my colleague, Caleb W., a staunch, dyed-in-the-wool conservative and chicken farmer, and possession of all chocolate (particularly the good European stuff) must be surrendered upon request.

Now, who is with me?

Fuss aside, Academy voters didn’t get it all wrong

Except for a few brief minutes when I turned on the TV Sunday, Feb. 22, to record a program, my boycott of the Oscars held true and fast for yet another year.

It’s funny, growing up, I used to look forward with no small amount of anticipation to tuning in to the Academy Awards each year. This was the pre-cable (at least for my family) and satellite TV and pre-Internet era. It was more difficult in those days to get a glimpse of your favorite actor (Harrison Ford), actress (Molly Ringwald — I know, I know, stop rolling your eyes) and director (a tie between Spielberg and Lucas).

I don’t know when it started exactly, but it was probably during the 80s that the Academy Awards began to spiral downward into an unbashed political platform for Hollywood to espouse all of its kooky, far-left liberal causes, beefs and ideologies. 

At first this was only irritating, an annoyance to be waded through for the chance to see your personal hero or heroine take the glizty stage under a spotlight. It was still worth it to see who won Best Actor, Best Actress, Best Director and Best Picture of the Year.

But the rhetoric became more and more vitriolic, foul and just plain old obnoxious. Like anyone really cares what some pampered, grotesquely overpaid celebrity thinks about a particular political issue or bleeding Third World cause?

The list of offenders is laboriously long. Names like Richard Gere, Susan Sarandon, Tim Robbins, Alec Baldwin, Spike Lee, Tom Cruise, and Sean Penn come to mind.

 

Rather than honoring the best in their field, the Oscar voters turned the program into a politically correct freak show drawing attention to the latest grievous social injustice and a summary denouncement of conservatives and traditional American values. These days, there’s always some Hollywood idiot up at the podium hijacking the broadcast while he castigates millions for their beliefs, values or the way they voted in a democratic process.

By many of the teary, self-indulgent acceptance Oscars rants during the three-plus hour Hollywood narcissistic love-in, an uneducated (or uninformed) viewer might think these egomaniacal stars were elected leaders, scientists, accredited sociologists and deity, all wrapped into one nice little nip-and-tucked bundle.

Even Mickey Rourke — whose was nominated this year for Best Actor in the film “The Wrestler” — sees through the litany of posers and pretenders.

“Actors should shut up about politics, because they tend to be ill-informed finger-pointers who just cozy up to some flavor-of-the-month liberal, you know?” he said.

 

The other thing about the Oscars that’s broken is the films that are honored. Rather than recognizing the excellence of some of the year’s titles that most moviegoers have enjoyed, its all about political crusade flicks, and art house and indie films no one has even heard of, let alone seen. It’s like Academy members are too sophisticated and above the rabble of general release films most Americans have seen, so they all cast their ballots for obscure, dark, brooding dramas only released in New York and Los Angeles.

While I’m a fan of foreign language, art house and indie pictures, I think we need to get back to movies most Americans have screened and actually care about.

So, did Hollywood get it right for Sunday’s 81st Annual Academy Awards? Let’s examine the winners.

 BEST PICTURE: “Slumdog Millionaire,” while I’ll admit I haven’t seen it yet (probably 99 percent of Americans haven’t, and again, that’s part of the problem), this sounds like a compelling film about an Indian teen who rises above the poverty all around him by winning on at TV game show in India. However I’m much more intrigued by the film “Frost/Nixon,” and its two leads, Frank Lagella, as disgraced former U.S. president Richard M. Nixon, and Michael Sheen, as interviewer David Frost. “Slumdog Millionaire” swept the Oscars, hauling in eight golden guys, including one for Best Director for Irishman Danny Boyle.

Grade: B-

 BEST ACTRESS: Kate Winslet for her role in “The Reader.” Again, haven’t seen the film, and probably won’t until it’s edited for TV due to the R-rated sexual content, but I have to say I LOVE Kate Winslet. One of the most talented (and gorgeous) actresses of our day, Britain’s Winslet has been compared to her competitor in this year’s category, Meryl Streep for “Doubt,” for her versatility and for picking challenging roles in quality dramas. Often actors are anointed with an Oscar for their body of work and not necessarily for their current film nomination. And while Winslet’s still relatively young, I think was a cumulative accolade for her.

Grade: A

BEST ACTOR: Sean Penn for his lead role in “Milk,” a biography of slain San Francisco gay rights activist Harvey Milk. I know I’m sounding like a broken record here — haven’t seen it (if you read my previous column about having two small children, you know why). And while I think Penn is a gifted actor, this flick is so totally a political agenda piece thinly disguised as a movie. Not surprisingly, Penn couldn’t resist at lashing out at California voters who approved Proposition 8 banning gay marriage and their “great shame” for opposing something many still believe is inappropriate. Apparently liberals only selectively define choice, tolerance, and diversity of opinion, depending on the subject.

As Fox News Channel host Bill O’Reilly said earlier this week, gay marriage won an Oscar on Sunday night.

Grade: D

BEST DIRECTOR: Danny Boyle for “Slumdog Millionaire.” Don’t know much about the guy but the film has generated positive buzz over the past several months and sounds like it deserves a watch.

Grade: B

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR: Heath Ledger for his amazingly creepy portrayal of super villain The Joker in last summer’s blockbuster “The Dark Knight.” No major qualms here. Ledger was a rising star in Hollywood and his role as the The Joker in the box-office smash of the year was probably his best performance yet. But I do think he received tons of sympathy votes because of his untimely death last year caused by prescription drugs. After all, immortalizing celebrities in their prime who die in a sudden fashion is an honored Hollywood marketing tradition.

Grade: A-

BEST ANIMATED FEATURE: “WALL-E” bested “Kung Fu Panda” and “Bolt” for the Oscar and deservingly so. Many critics argued the amazing film that featured virtually no dialogue between the lead characters about a lonely robot in the future should have been nominated for Best Picture. A touching love story, this one appealed to adults as much as children.

Grade: A

BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM: Japan’s “Departures.” A best kept-secret from American moviegoers, most foreign language films nominated in this category are genuine cinematic gems. Truth be told, if many of these films were to go head-to-head against Best Picture nominees, the foreign language flicks would win by a mile. Other nominees in the category include Germany’s “The Baader Meinhof Complex,” France’s “The Class,” Austria’s “Revanches,” and Israel’s “Waltz with Bashir.”

Grade: A

∫ Michael is a reporter and editor for a daily newspaper in Provo, Utah.