DramatistDreamer

So it's not just activists and assorted individuals who want to get rid of ICE, it's also agents within. I guess the protests and the protestations have caused agents to speak out. Agents Seek to Dissolve ICE in Immigration Policy Backlash

I'm not sure about Bob & Kim--it seems as only when Sabrina showed up in Oakdale did people put two and two together. I know that Barbara had feelings about it and everyone told her to sit on them. By this time, people were less sympathetic toward Barbara for all of the stunts and tricks she had pulled the previous year. Bob and Susan's affair definitely became public knowledge and once it did, Susan's reputation suffered more fallout than Bob's did. Granted, Susan was already seen in a negative light. Bob really only had to deal with Kim, while Susan had to deal with everyone, with the exception of John and Emily.

OMG at that reference to the Legend of Billie Jean. And that I've actually seen that movie.

I came across the bio of D.W. Moffett who played Kim's therapist Dr. Chapin (in the aftermath of the Doug Cummings murder) and the show should've kept him on. He has aged nicely! http://www.dwmoffett.com/

Well, I hardly expect him to talk about how many hateful insults he has leveled at the media and the possibility that he inspired someone to act on it.

Vera Zvonareva (remember her?) won all of her qualifier matches to get into the main draw at Wimbledon.

While nobody's paying attention, so how about them American workers?

In the case of Reva Shayne and Brooke Logan, there was always a whiff of scandal and they were regarded as town tramps and sluts-- also their families were never the most esteemed. The irony of Bob and his philandering and affairs was that it never once truly affected his reputation as a great doctor and a pillar of his community. In fact, the entire Hughes family usually managed to remain above infamy, for the most part, despite Kim's murder trial (yes, I know she was innocent) and Margo having an affair and child with a co-worker.

What f*ckin election did he win?? Look at some of the faces of the bystanders in that picture--split between those who don't believe a word of what he just said while others are humoring him the way one humors a doddering old fool. Or is that "dotard"? Women's reproductive rights is not just about Roe v. Wade (though that is a large part of it) but also access to birth control and family planning initiatives. The recent story of the woman who had a miscarriage comes to mind. This woman was prescribed medication and the pharmacist refused to fill the prescription, preferring to let the woman suffer instead. There is a strong possibility that we will see more of these types of situations arise.

A few years ago, I remember seeing an interview where Julianne Moore once described the Hughes family as being a pillar of the community but that the situation with Frannie and Sabrina having the same father while their mothers were each other's aunts as "disgusting".

I appreciate you.

I've been wanting that to happen for ages! Sometimes I get the feeling that actors have been very careful about what they say in the past but now that the show's been over for nearly a decade, I'd love to read/hear/see an unguarded interview of BTS dynamics as well as the work itself. I'm fascinated by that stuff.

I had to do a quick search to locate it again: Do flattening yield curves warn of impending recession? Didn't read this article but gave the headline a passing glance:

And just this morning I was reading that the bond markets are predicting a looming recession. Hope that's wrong but this person claims that bond markets have accurately predicted financial forecast for many years now.

I'm hearing that Justice Kennedy is retiring. EDT: Receipts. How very unfortunate.

I think sitting or standing uses the back in very different ways than reaching for a serve, crouching for a volley or even torquing the body for a backhand smash. Maybe part of his break is also a mental health holiday. I really don't have a problem with that.

There are plenty of threads (not just ATWT's thread) where I discuss things I like about ATWT, in particular. We've spoken at length about the "warm feeling" of the episodes where characters gather for holidays, weddings, funerals, picnics and other events. Here is one where I compare ATWT and Y&R and why as a theater person, I loved ATWT, in particular. https://boards.soapoperanetwork.com/topic/49109-soaps-that-were-filmed-in-new-york/?do=findComment&comment=1279586 Here's another post where I lament the fact that there aren't enough episodes posted on You Tube that show just how juicy certain storylines were and how I'd pay money to see them in their entirety again. https://boards.soapoperanetwork.com/topic/37693-as-the-world-turns-discussion-thread/?do=findComment&comment=1279682 This post is actually by @DRW50 who is very complimentary about a particular aspect of the show, complete with a clip to illustrate. Here's a post where I talk about how ATWT has some of the nimblest actors in daytime and would do very well in a live broadcast. Granted this is more classic ATWT but it is a reference to how talented these actors were that they could transition to a live performance in front of cameras. https://boards.soapoperanetwork.com/topic/49517-which-daytime-dramas-would-be-great-if-they-had-to-go-live/ A lot of compliments about The Willows episodes. https://boards.soapoperanetwork.com/topic/37693-as-the-world-turns-discussion-thread/?do=findComment&comment=1294789 I've also made "positive" posts about things such as how talented I thought the direction was by people like Maria Wagner. No one really talks about directors but a bad director can really botch a well written scene. I've also posted previously about how much I enjoyed the "roving" camera technique that appeared to be unique to ATWT in the 1980s. I don't have time to dig but I discussed how the technique was employed and how challenging it is to pull off and perhaps that's why it isn't done anymore. Not too long ago, we discussed how progressive the Susan and Dan Open Marriage storyline was, especially for the 1970s. In many ways, far more progressive than what is illustrate on today's soaps. And unlike the Newman Y&R storyline, ATWT handled their with more realism and thought. There are many positive posts about ATWT, not just in this thread but in other threads (you'll even find some in Y&R's thread), if you care to truly search. Just because you don't see them in a passing glance, doesn't mean they don't exist. If you're looking solely for the negative in things, I guess that's what you'll get. I don't think people should have to justify how much we cheerlead. There are plenty of messageboards that do that. As I said, I enjoy this particular board because we can post critically and understand that, in general, we enjoyed the show. Having to continually post what is deemed an acceptably positive post, requires a kind of spoon-feeding that I think you won't find here.

@adrnyc Please don't be offended by what I'm about to tell you because I genuinely enjoy most of your posts and engaging with you: We think critically on this board. We debate, we pull apart, we deconstruct. It's what I enjoy most about this board, is to have critical, thoughtful discussions of storylines, characterizations, direction, music cues and use of popular music, sets, even wardrobe and hair. Also, budgets, the socio-economic times in which stories were written. The strengths as well as the flaws of the writers and how it affected the show, both positively and negatively. I think you'll find that we are fans of the show but we also realize the problems that did impact the show, some of which were precipitated by the producers of the show, some of which were precipitated by the industry itself, and some where happened as a natural flow of events in the overall culture. We can appreciate when things are done well and do discuss them but we are not going to be shy about discussing and yes, deconstructing things that are not done well. No, we aren't cheerleaders here. Correct me if I'm wrong but you seem to have an issue with the fact that we appear to be very critical of the last decade of the show? We are critical of all eras that we've been able to see on camera and discuss with some facility. As a writer, I've had my work read aloud in workshops and some can find the process uncomfortable to brutal but in grad school, I've learned that a writer can be protective but not become 'too precious' of his or her work. I will defend the aspects of my work that I believe to be worthy but I also have learned to be open to critique of what is lacking or deficient. It's a part of the process of making the work sharper, stronger and ultimately more powerful and engaging. It's what every writer wants. The thing is, most writers (the ones who are worth their salt) welcome their work being engaged with. Indifference is worse than dislike. I don't know what to say except that we have some strong opinions around here and this a great space to freely discuss them. I truly appreciate this. It's what keeps me coming back to this board.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ran in the Bronx/Queens district, on a Medicare for All and Abolish ICE platform. She also ran against a 10 term Senator and the campaign was actually a hard fought but relatively amicable race. In fact, most of the primary races on the Democratic side seemed to be waged in good spirit, even the highly competitive ones. Another note about the NY Primaries. Except for Ocasio-Cortez (a former bartender who is genuinely from a working class background), all the other races were won by incumbents.

Speaking of the SCOTUS, a reminder that low voter turnout is a big deal that has consequences. Why do people gloss over voter suppression? I'm genuinely asking. Why is there no national conversation about the ways in which the U.S. makes it difficult for groups of people to vote? If low voter turnout had such perilous consequences (as many believe), and suppression is a tactic that has been successfully used to lower voter turnout, why are there so few people having an earnest discussion of this, the way that civility is being debated and discussed? Is it because race intersects the issue and people want to avoid the topic of race? I'm really trying to understand. In all the discussions about voting and midterms, it seems most people go out of their way to avoid this topic.

Even MLK got tired. I meant the U.S. has a history of aggression that has worked for the people in charge. People who act out in this manner are usually feeling powerless and may not have the tools to react otherwise. People spent more than a year saying as much to explain Trump voters but this explanation is now no longer valid. At least acknowledge the frustration and helplessness, perhaps this would do better than endless lecturing. Obama was POTUS and was always being behaviorally monitored. If he so much as swatted a fly, people gasped. Are we really going to try to claim that Black men (even one in high office) are given the same leeway as White men in this country? Anyone who believes this has never been Black in America. The same people who are urging people to remain civil are urging Obama to go down to one of the detention centers and throw himself in acts of civil disobedience and get arrested. Honestly, if I were Obama, I'd tell people to go f*ck themselves right now. And yeah, Obama tried his damnest to be civil, even in the face of people who called him derogatory names and yeah, yes, it did get Gorsuch, because only he was complying with the terms of engagement. Where he would've been had he acted like Trump? Probably not alive has a history, especially with powerful Black men. Just as MLK. Oh wait...! The midterms are in November and with a whack job in the WH, I seriously doubt lack of civility will be the sole focus, especially since there is a proven lack of an attention span among American. People will move on to the next crisis (and there will be a next crisis). But my point is, all the hand-wringing about civility has got my eyes rolling back because either way this changes little. I thought it was a faux outrage issue with Wolffe's WHCD monologue and my opinion hasn't changed. I can have all the best manners in a store but guess what? If a person wants to have a security guard follow and harass me in the store because I'm a Black woman, all the manners in the world won't prevent it. People get fed up, especially if people feel hopeless. I just get tired of the people who want to play respectability politics and dictate rules of engagement to one side. It's more likely that that the more people are lectured, the more likely they are to dig in even deeper. But yeah, lecturing people in the most condescending way will really help quell the situation.

People decrying the lack of civility while conveniently forgetting America's history is rich. Til this day we all have to hear about the god*damned Tea Party, which was, in truth, a riot. Maybe the reason why people are citing that Republicans are practicing rudeness and lack of decorum is because it has clearly worked for them. Perhaps many Democrats have realized that civility got Neil Gorsuch who is helping to strike down laws that protect civil rights for certain groups as we speak. When I look at U.S. history, honestly, I don't see a whole lot of civility, except when you look at the groups that have been hosed, bitten by dogs, bombed out, pistol-whipped by authority. I also see a lot of gains made by groups that have kidnapped, enslaved, beaten, tortured, raided entire villages and lynched people. No wonder people think being aggressive has worked in America. Civility works in America? History says otherwise.

And The Boodles exho is on live stream on You Tube. There was a match between Dimitrov v. Tsitsipas which just ended.

What's interesting is that the fact that the U.S. has experienced church bombings, abortion doctor's murders and intimidation, not to mention the woman who was backed over in Charlottesville and I don't remember this much hand-wringing over civility. It seems that these lectures are reserved for kneeling, public shaming and acts that are deemed 'bad optics'. At this point, it's beyond whether it achieves anything or not (which is debatable) but whether some types of protest/expression draw more censure and public outcry than others. It inspires a lot of eye-rolling from me. Meanwhile,