DramatistDreamer

I don't think that's it. This mRNA technology has been in the works for nearly twenty years now. Money and politics are more likely to figure into these decisions.

Originally, I had planned for Moderna (not because of Dolly but because of the epidemiologist whose work I had been reading about who was part of the team that had developed the Moderns vaccine) but left it open for whatever 2 dose vaccine was available. I went into it knowing that none of these pharmaceutical companies are particularly ethical, but the same can be said of most large corporations and I knew, similar to when I take a multivitamin (supplements, which, by the way are the least regulated industry in the U.S.) or a pain reliever, I would just have to trust the science behind the product. I didn't intend to leave myself vulnerable if I could help matters and that involved getting vaccinated. My one recurring question is, why didn't one of these companies formulate the COVID-19 vaccine in a similar fashion to the flu vaccine, which can quickly be adjusted to variants and different strains? I guess they figured that they wouldn't have to deal with this many variants?

Moderna, which it's been established, has the most effective vaccine, as it offers a high level of protection over the longest period of time, is effectively pricing out low-income and middle-income countries, in favor of the highest bidders, even though they took nearly $1 million dollars from a non-profit with the promise to deliver vaccine equity. Moderna, racing for profits, keeps jabs out of reach of poor

One of the aspects of NYC living that I missed most had been the NYC Public Library system, even more so when I had discovered they had access to Kanopy. Well, call me tardy, because I just found out that the NYPL cut Kanopy, citing high costs. It makes me wonder how much longer Kanopy will be sustainable and will other library systems follow suit?

Eh, nice will get you a half-priced sandwich on a good day. Most players who want to win matches will show you that they're not really nice. Sportsmanlike is more than adequate. By the way, I don't believe that either Kim Clijsters or Petra Kvitova are actually "nice", especially not on court when that killer instinct kicks in and they want to grab that match win. Even someone fitting that stereotypical definition of nice can be pushed into not-so-nice behavior, every once in awhile. These matches have gone on too late for me to consider watching, but I had to howl with laughter when I saw a tweet that described Sloane as "slow-footed" in her loss to Pegula. It's well known that Sloane often refuses to move her feet. I guess Pegula was coached well on what to look for.

Supposedly, Kurz was often promoted as the new face of young conservatism, according to this article and tbh, I remember the pomp and circumstance and numerous mentions of him supposedly heralding an era of center-right and right-wing governance in Europe. Oh, how times have changed.

There are plenty of women in their ranks as well, gaslighting as they so along. They are the heirs to Schafly.

We won't get into some Y&R fans and their tirades over interracial relationships on that show.🙄🤐 That's best suited for another thread.

Yeah, thanks @DRW50, I figured it was something like that. Sadly, when you know some are in it for the clicks. One of the reasons I appreciate what B&B has done, making their episodes available on YouTube. Also, I am screaming😂 at the way their YouTube streamed episodes from the 80s are pulling higher caliber ads than their episodes that air on actual broadcast television.

Who do I have to blackmail to get a never before posted and rarely seen episode up on YouTube?

Oh, sometimes I forget how provincial soap fans could be, particularly CBS daytime soap fans.

I liked this aspect, that Lisa was loyal in equal measure, despite feeling that Bob was the "one that got away". I appreciate when there are complicated feelings at work. Wow, we stated this at virtually the same time!

😲 Wow, do tell ...

Wow, 20 years, congratulations on a really great idea that expanded even further. The soaps may be dull at times (more often than many of us had wanted) but the discussions certainly aren't. The atmosphere is always lively.

That's my point entirely. If he was a provider but rough hewn or offered a sense of security, I saw none of these things onscreen. Frankly, they weren't even implied. Whit was just there barking at his children occasionally even snapping at Lisa. What is obvious though, is why they got rid of the character.

Ireland and the other holdouts have finally relented.

Some of those episodes are, in fact, on YouTube and yes, it is obvious that Whit was "going down" in that very soapy set up. I don't have questions about that. I do have questions about what appeal Whit had to Lisa a woman who clearly had no need of his money or reputation to get on in life. Way before he was being set up, Whit was not nice. His relationship with Brian was on and off, Kirk was convinced that his father never really liked him and even Diana, who supposedly was his favorite, he talked down to, as if he thought her incapable of making a single sensible decision in life. Now, since Kirk was was indeed his biological son, raised in his household, as his son, regardless of his maternity, honestly, I would expect him to be included in the will, despite the sh*tty treatment by Whit. In reality, Whit treated all of his kids somewhat sh*tty. Just based on treatment alone, you'd think that Craig was his heir. He seemed to be the only one Whit liked. Anybody answered that question about Jillian? I realize that Brian also dated a Juliet (seriously dated) not long before, which is a bit odd.

I just don't get the appeal of Whit. I realize that aspects of the backstory that are retconned but since there are so few episodes of Whit and Lisa together as a couple posted on YouTube, I wanted to know whether there was more of an indication that Whit had some other aspects to his personality besides barking at his children and the occasional cutting remark to Lisa. I just don't see any romantic chemistry. My other question was about Jillian and Brian and Jillian and Barbara's obvious souring relationship and when exactly that happened and why?

Whit was such a meanie, I am honestly looking at these old episodes and wondering what Lisa saw in him. I appreciate that the show would build a rivalry between Lisa and Lucinda based on each woman's devotion to preserving her husband's memory but Whit seemed gruff and coarse. He didn't even seem to treat his own children with much regard. People make fun of Earl but at least there was some kind of charm there and chemistry between Earl and Lisa. Also, does anyone remember how long Brian and Jillian dated? I seem to remember some miscommunication between them and Brian and Barbara, who had a falling out and Barbara scolded Brian for what she believed was leading Jillian on but down the road when Brian and Shannon were dating, it seemed as though Jillian and Barbara didn't like each other one bit. I think Jillian even made a cutting remark to Barbara about being glad that Brian was with Shannon and not Barbara, after Barbara implied that Jillian must be hurt to see Shannon and Brian together. I wonder why and how they became so antagonistic toward each other. There are no episodes to show that trajectory. I know that's not Jillian in this episode.

You're welcome. Just a few ideas, in short. Gaslighting is an apt description @DRW50. It really feels that way.

On a previous post, I already gave my ideas on Lucinda (and John, by extension). My basic premise is the idea that there should be a final "ending" was not ideal. I compared the finale episodes for AMC and ATWT and gave my thoughts on why AMC, despite some clumsy execution provided a better ending than ATWT and why this gave AMC some viability and a chance for at least one reboot, something that is unlikely to ever happen for ATWT. In short, AMC left their characters viable, while ATWT completely put their characters out to pasture. Never "sunset" your characters, unless someone dies in the end. Even Thelma and Louise left a little room for "What If?" in the end, despite the fact that intellectually, we all knew they went over that cliff. (As preposterous as it was, that ending actually inspired talk of sequels). To be as brief and as descriptive as I can, If I had a chance to write storyline arcs to the finale for Barbara, for example, I would give her options, I wouldn't just shove her with Henry as a "happily ever after". I would spoil her for choice. At least a year before the finale, I would have Barbara relaunch BRO (or whatever they wanted to call it). Have Barbara be a driven designer having her own design house. We don't have to see runway but see her in the process of making sketches, discussing fabric, cut and debuting collections in Milan, London, etc. (Paul can make the trips abroad, returning with rave reviews), have there be so much interest that she is drawing notice from other fashion houses to do collaborations have Eric Forrester be interested in her (perhaps for more reasons than professional). He makes an offer to Barbara which is tempting but Barbara decides that this is not the right time in her life for such a monumental change that could uproot her very stable life, Eric, convinced they will work together, urges her to give it more thought. As Barbara and Henry grow closer and eventually get engaged with plans to marry soon, a surprise return from Barbara's past comes back into her life and unwittingly crashes her big engagement party, right in the middle of Bob Hughes's toast, which causes Barbara to reconsider whether her life is as steady, stable and as sure as she thought. Eric, hearing about what happened at the engagement party suggests that she come to L.A. for awhile, give herself time to process the recent upheaval and work with him on that collaborative collection with FC, married or not, he believes they would make a dynamic team). Of course, there would be conversations with Henry, who stands by her and hopes that this is a momentary obstacle to their impending nuptials (although Henry doesn't see divulge that Vienna Hyatt has contacted him, offering her support to him and more). This surprise "guest" from Barbara's past also also offers Barbara a window into a past, before she acquired all the "baggage" she now has, as this person remembers her from a time when she was free from scandal and judgement. I have my ideas on how I would wrap on that, if I ever have the time to sit down and write that, I just might put it in writing. Lucinda, I wrote some of that piece but I would definitely write her as looking to groom a successor, her own "wunderkind" to run Worldwide, while, of course, still very much holding onto the reigns at the company. The best option would have been Bryant, which she always envisioned taking over from the day he was born (there are actual clips of her saying this), and this would create good conflict with Bryant's parents. The problem of TIIC killing off Bryant could have been solved in true soap fashion, and I have already posted what I would write (anybody remember this?) as a solution. But yeah, I would never "sunset" these characters. Keep them viable, give them options because one never knows.

Considering the fact that AT&T have been bad actor almost consistently for years, I won't hold my breath on that one.

Hasn't this country always been kind of terrible though? Genocide, slavery, exploitation... it's just that the veneer of gentility, fairness and upward mobility has been scraped away.