Missing Tom Bombadil

Peter Jackson did an amazing job with The Lord Of The Rings trilogy. Some will complain about this and that, but overall, the movies were very entertaining and captured the beauty of Tolkien's Middle Earth very well. With Jackson producing The Hobbit, there were some who complained that he was milking it for money by splitting the book into three movies. I understand the argument, but I don't see it that way. Peter was connecting the two stories in a way that Tolkien didn't when he wrote the best selling novels. I'm not saying he made it better, but I get what he was doing. There was good and bad in those movies.

For The Lord Of The Rings, Peter cut a couple of sections from the story that I enjoyed. There was The Scouring Of The Shire, where the hobbits showed how much they had grown since they departed their beloved home land to destroy the ring. Then, there's the trip through The Old Forest and their encounter with Tom Bombadil. I would have loved to have seen this on the DVD at least.

Unlike all the other characters Frodo tried to give the ring to, Tom Bombadil was totally unfazed by it. He simply didn't care. He even made the ring disappear in front of Frodo and freaked him out. Tom didn't care for politics or any of the news of impending war. All that mattered to him was his wife Goldberry and their life together in The Old Forrest. He was the embodiment of true neutrality.

Gandalf later speculated that Tom would be defeated too if Sauron had his way and got the ring, but I actually think Tom was stronger than they realized. Tolkien never really clarified that, so it's open to interpretation. Tom's attitude was that if anybody tried to do harm in his territory, he would deal with them himself. He may have been the oldest living person in Middle Earth.

Jackson did not want to touch this, and I totally understand why. It doesn't hurt the movie at all that Tom Bombadil is not in it. In fact, it probably helps the viewers avoid confusion. You have Gandalf, Galadriel and Boromir freaking out over the prospect of having that ring, and Tom Bombadil doesn't care one way or the other. Still, I like the monkey wrench he throws into the plot. You have clearly defined good and evil, and here's this other very powerful guy who refuses to pick a side.

I read a suggestion on a message board that Robin Williams would have been perfect as Tom in the movie. That would have been interesting. Robin could have played this character perfectly. It would have been fun, and I did miss not seeing the way the hobbits really left The Shire. Visiting Fatty Bolger, Old Man Willow, Tom Bombadil and the rest. It's a shame we never saw any of that, but I understand why Jackson went the way he did with the story.

I envision the movie they could have done, maybe for TV. This is after Frodo left for The Undying Lands. Sam, Pippin and Merry are at a pub, telling stories about how they departed The Shire. Then, we see Tom and the other missing scenes. Then they recall The Scouring Of The Shire and we see how they were able to save their home land. It would have been interesting, but it was not to be. Still, when I look at The Fellowship Of The Ring, I can't help but miss Tom Bombadil.

Who Is The Face Of Van Halen Now?

Since guitarist Eddie Van Halen passed away earlier this year, people have speculated about whether the band could continue on without him. I'm not sure that is a good idea, but we have bands touring without any original members. When there's money involved, anything is possible.

A Twitter poll posed an interesting question today. Who is the face of Van Halen now? The choices were David Lee Roth, Sammy Hagar, Gary Cherone and Wolfgang Van Halen. Let's look at this question.

Wolfgang is Eddie's son. He is the heir to his father's legacy and has a voice in all matters concerning the Van Halen brand. Gary Cherone was a blip on the radar. It's an insult to see him included and a certain band member excluded for the choices here.

Roth was the lead singer and in many ways the face of the band as it rose to the top. He's still touring and is probably the best authentic connection to those years. Love him or hate him, that's just the truth.

Hagar was the voice of the band from the mid 1980s through the mid 90s. When it comes to those years, Sammy is the best authentic voice representation of those songs. He's the one who made them famous.

As for who the face of the band is now, however, I'd have to say it's Alex Van Halen. Alex was there as the drummer every step of the way. The Van Halen brand name likely belongs to he and Wolfgang. Whether Roth has legal claim to the brand name, I don't know.

If there is still a Van Halen that would have a "face" to it at this point, Alex would be it. If he so chose to do something new, he could do it. Wolfgang might have a say in that. The others probably don't.

It's not likely to happen, but you never know when there's money involved. Replacing Eddie is not an easy task. At the moment, every other player in the band is still out there, and fans would pay to see them.

I don't think Alex or Wolfgang would feel good about doing it, and I don't blame them. Can't we just let a brother and a son grieve for the loss of a loved one? It's way too soon for discussions like this.

President Trump Should Continue To Fight For A Fair Election

There are people saying that President Donald Trump needs to concede the election and stop pointing out all the irregularities that occurred on election night. They maintain that he would be the lead Republican candidate in 2024 and could run again. There's just one problem with all of that. It's complete and utter BS. First of all, there are way too many irregularities to not warrant some serious investigations into what happened that night. Secondly, don't expect the Republican party to welcome Trump back as their candidate in 2024.

Democrats might like the idea of Trump giving up now and coming back later. It would work to their party's advantage. Consider the possibility that Trump decides he really wants to run again in four years and the Republican party blocks him. It's not that far of a stretch to think that this could happen. There are "Never Trumpers" in the party who would do what they could to rig the system against him. However, Trump has enough support that he could run as a third party candidate in 2024. I don't believe he would win the Republican nomination, but as a third party candidate he would almost guarantee a Democrat victory.

If I were to consider the next move for Trump if he ultimately loses or concedes the election, I would say he'd be better off trying to establish the Trump News Network. He's been right in the center of the storm of left-wing media attacks. He understands more than most what impact the media has had on things. He also understands that it's not going to get any better if nothing's done about it. Therefore, he could have more of an impact on politics and the information people get if he were to jump into the arena by creating a new media alternative. For that matter, he could play a part in creating alternative social media options for the people.

All of this is speculation. The fact is, Trump is fighting for a fair election right now. Millions and millions of people support him in that effort. The bottom line is there are way too many irregularities that happened during this election. There are other things that Trump is privy to behind the scenes leading up to the election. He needs to fight this all the way to the Supreme Court, because there are millions of Americans who don't trust this election. Millions of people won't just accept that Joe Biden had 11 million more votes than a very popular Barack Obama when he was elected president in 2008.

Here are some things to consider. There were more than 20 million people voting in this presidential election than in 2016. That is a huge increase, and it happened during a pandemic. I wouldn't say that Joe Biden was largely unpopular with the people, but there was lukewarm support for him at best. People will claim that Biden didn't have big support at his rallies because he didn't encourage that. However, when somebody is popular, the people will flock to see them. Cars would be lined up alongside the road with Biden banners waving proudly, even if they couldn't be at the rally itself. That didn't happen. Trump commanded huge support everywhere he went.

On election night, the trends were pointing towards the same type of Trump victory he achieved in 2016. The media covered things differently this time, going so far as to not proclaim Trump victories in certain states even though they knew he had won them. Suddenly, vote counting stopped in about a half-dozen states, four of which Trump was leading by big margins. In Pennsylvania, Trump held a 700,000 vote lead over Biden. He led by about 300,000 votes in Michigan. Vote counting simply stopped for various reasons, raising suspicions.

In the middle of the night, both Michigan and Wisconsin shifted in Biden's favor. People woke up to the news that Biden was leading both states all of a sudden. Both states were then proclaimed victories for Biden. Over the next day or two, Pennsylvania flipped, as did Georgia. Here's where it gets interesting. Up until the big shifts in those four key states, Trump was beating Biden in each state by around a 52% to 48% margin. After that, Biden was getting anywhere between 70% and 75% of the remaining votes in all of those states. Mathematically, that doesn't make a lot of sense, but that's what the media would have you believe.

There have been people willing to testify under oath regarding various irregularities in the way the votes were handled. Pole watchers were not allowed to view the vote counting. There were enough red flags to cause any rational thinking adult concern. Rather than dive in and ask serious questions, the media continues to gaslight everybody, telling them that there is no evidence of any sort of fraud. Social media did its part by either censoring or suspending people who posted what wasn't approved or running disclaimers that election fraud has been disputed.

To be honest with you, I have serious questions about the election. This feels like the most unfair and possibly even rigged election I've witnessed in my lifetime. I say that as somebody who isn't a big Trump or Biden supporter. Trump is the one who actually went through this ordeal, and he has a Constitutional right to ask questions and take legal action if need be. There is no four years from now for him. Trump knows better than to think that a path will be cleared for him to run again. He knows that he and his family will be under intense attack once he leaves office. If he doesn't fight this now, not only does he lose, but the country itself could lose. People will doubt whether we can trust an election again.

The media as well as people on social media are painting a picture of Trump ruining our Democracy. We live in a Republic, by the way. There is a difference. Trump has never said that he won't leave the White House at the appropriate time. Other formalities, such as the electoral vote, haven't occurred yet. Right now, the media is the one proclaiming Joe Biden the winner. It's not even official yet. 

What Trump is doing is no worse than what Al Gore did in 2000. Gore had a right to fight for his potential victory, and Trump has that same right. Trump isn't saying he will refuse to leave if Biden is ultimately declared the official winner. It's the media and left leaning social media people saying that. Millions of people believe he needs to fight this with everything he has. Fortunately, that's what Trump is going to do. He's not damaging anything by fighting as hard as he is. Unfortunately, the damage was done long ago.