DRW50

The Native American stuff is the main reason I was wary of supporting her in the primary. It's always going to be an issue, but at least she is trying to repair some of the damage. I read that Susan Sarandon is out making digs about her. No surprise there, really. I see a lot of comments about stories like the the one about the abused women which basically say - we have our own problems. And these comments are from Democrats, and people who could see themselves as moderate or liberal. I understand why people feel that way, but I worry about what this coarsening will do to America in the long term. That's the worst of Trump, in some ways - in the long term he has encouraged so much coarsening and rotting away of the best of what the country was meant to be (even if it was rarely actually able to live up to that best).

I think it's great news. I thought she was terrific last season and she and Goodman had such a natural chemistry. I don't think the show will push it too fast either.

What a [!@#$%^&*] joke. And not at all surprising. https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/18/mark-halperin-book-deal-1467085 Judith Regan is expected to release this statement about why she is publishing Halperin’s book: “I do not in any way, shape, or form condone any harm done by one human being to another. I have also lived long enough to believe in the power of forgiveness, second chances, and offering a human being a path to redemption. HOW TO BEAT TRUMP is an important, thoughtful book, and I hope everyone has a chance to read it.”

That is somewhere between incredibly embarrassing and incredibly dangerous.

If you pay they put it up.

I liked the story with her helping the waitress. I know it's one of those stories used as an example of why the season didn't work, but I felt that it was a nice throwback to the early seasons.

I agree with you, but then I feel like these games aren't meant for anyone outside of his base. It seems to work every time. I hope this time that doesn't turn out to be the case.

http://www.knotslanding.net/interviews/joan2.htm "Loathed" was probably too strong a word on my part, but she lumps it in with material of this era she disliked (the chat person names LML and BL but I think someone else had taken over this season). Alex Wade from Detroit, Michigan asks In close to your last season of Knots, Val loses her marbles yet again. In what could have been a same, tired old storyline, is in fact one of Val’s most entertaining forays into madness. How did you keep it fresh after all those years of playing borderline crazy? JVA: Which storyline does he mean? AS: My guess is the one in your second to last season when you fell off the horse and wound up somehow getting a brain virus. Val did all sorts of weird things like stir-frying the kids’ hermit crabs. JVA: Oh right, right. That one did ask a lot of me. I think the writers tested me with that one. I think they were testing me, sending me up. Val’s going to stir-fry the kids’ pets … how much crazier could she have gotten? But I guess this person from Detroit enjoyed it and that’s what the writers were going for. Maybe he saw it as a fun variation on a constant, repetitive theme. AS: So you really didn’t like what they were doing with Val at that time. JVA: No I really didn’t. I’m thinking of two particular writers who liked making fun of Val. Before, I’d go to David Jacobs, who was the creator and executive producer of the show and I’d talk about certain scenes and tweak them, but in this case I didn’t object or confront the two writers … there wasn’t allowed to be a dialogue. AS: Were these two just two writers? Did you talk to the head writers? JVA: These were the head writers at the time. AS: Oh, (Lynn Marie) Latham and (Bernard) Lechowick were the ones you didn’t like. That’s interesting. JVA (hesitantly): I guess you know the behind the scenes things that were going on then. AS: Well, I interviewed John Pleshette about a month ago and he couldn’t stand them. JVA: They came into a show that was established and … I really don’t know if I should be saying this here … but there was a little bit of turning it upside down. God bless ‘em for going on and having successful careers (after Knots) but it became more and more challenging to play Val the way they wrote for her. Oh and happy birthday.

Bibi is a messy and thuggish figure so I'm not surprised he didn't go that route. Today they offered Congresswoman Tlaib the opportunity to visit her grandmother, which she declined (and I can understand why she did), so that ends up making them look magnanimous, even though they have no right to be seen that way. So the optics tilt their way, as usual.

If it sends the message that they had no real choice then it will be seen as true and that the government is just saving face. So it's effective propaganda.

Given how little interest Bravo has in gay men who aren't purses, it's for the best.

Bibi was already doing this with Obama. The media hyped it up as Israel, and also Asia, humiliating Obama, especially since he didn't directly respond (as he was smart enough to not do so). Now we have a so-called "tough guy" and look where it's gotten us. On the road to nowhere.

That sounds like propaganda to me. I don't believe that Bibi has been bullied by Trump. They know this is a horrible optic for Israel, one that is going to do real damage long-term, and they are trying to pass the buck.

I imagine the people around Trump are still lying to him until it gets to the lowest level. They are probably just planning to harvest the UK anyway (I read they want the UK to drastically lower their food safety standards).

We're at the point where nobody cares. "Jawn Wick" trended on Twitter for hours and hours. People thought the Philly shootings were hilarious.

If the UK economy tanks then I wonder how far Trump will run from that "trade deal" and will instead just start tweeting about how weak they are and what losers they are. I wonder who made Trump push the latest tariffs up a few months. Someone said he is probably just waiting for the companies to be able to bail out. That makes sense. Everyone has known he would tank the economy. And most of us have no way to cope, other than crossing our fingers. Times like this I assume it's done deliberately, just as in 2008, where W's economy tanked and Obama got all the blame.

That's great for him. He should fit in well. Is it just a guest spot?

He's just another example of a two-faced media personality. People have used the word "fredo" on his network. Yet he's upset when the term is thrown at him. Oh it's just as bad as "the n word," how dare you, blah blah blah. He gets a free pass because a lot of people want to [!@#$%^&*] him. He's just as worthless as anybody else at CNN.

Her talking about how it wasn't meant to be taken lightly is glaring in contrast to the writer saying he wanted to have fun and be outrageous. I do wonder why her past story wasn't mentioned. The only time I saw it mentioned was a decade later when Marcy and Jennifer Bassey were talking about their years working together. I didn't get the impression either of them were fond of the plot.

Considering how crassly JFP treated rape she had some guts to criticize others for doing the same.

Jake could have had a much bigger career than he does. I wish he'd left EE years ago, when he still cared.

It makes no damn sense. If you want to believe in that type of insanity, it may have made sense in the '90s, but stopped once we got to 2008, where Obama not only did a great deal of damage to her political career (really, I'd say he effectively ended her political career) but also led to something of a black eye to Bill's legacy. You can say that the way Bill and Hillary spoke about him was terrible, because it was, but if there was ever a "body count," surely it would have sprung up somewhere around then.

Eddie Drueding and munecojim have a few episodes up.

I've thought that beefcake photo of Richard Gutrhie was just beautiful from the first time I saw it. It's so subversive, from before that was really a thing (at least in this type of mainstream publication). Most of those type of photos of half-naked guys would put an emphasis on machismo, whereas his pose and attire is much more open to telling people, intentionally or not, that there is a world for attractive men beyond glowering in your blue jeans. I have a feeling that was a defining memory for more than a few boys going through their mother or aunt's soap magazines...