Khan

Yeah, how would the author know? Because, I've read the opposite: Trump was not close with his kids -- especially not with Tiffany -- and that Donald Jr. and Eric grew up alternately resenting him and seeking his approval.

Nope. It isn't. That's why it's more important than ever for citizens to rally behind the so-called "fourth estate." A free and unfiltered press is the very last barrier separating us from complete tyranny. If that barrier falls -- and the way things are looking, it just might -- we are truly, truly doomed.

If Trump and his gutter trash clan embody American family values, then this country DESERVES to burn.

Man, it don't get more '90's, or '90's-era Aaron Spelling, than that theme song.

Ah, memories light the corners of my mind....

Also, when you think about how Irna (and Bill Bell) had intended AW to be an ATWT spinoff (before it ended up on NBC) and that the two shows DID share a character (Mitchell Dru) once upon a time, it just made more sense. IIRC, Stephen Schnetzer made several appearances on GL as Cass; and IMO, it was an odd fit.

It might have made more sense during the James Stenbeck years, when the two men were virtually ATWT's version of Itchy and Scratchy. Well, there were OTHER factors that played into that decision. But I don't know whether I'm at liberty to say. It's a shame P&G didn't ask Robert Calhoun to succeed Ed Trach as the exec in charge for all their soaps. I feel like they would have been in much better hands with him than they were with Ken Fitts and especially MADD.

Actually, he named Holden after Holden Caufield, from J.D. Salinger's "The Catcher in the Rye." Just as Iva was named after Iva Archer, the widow of Sam Spade's fallen business partner, in "The Maltese Falcon." I always thought it odd how Darryl, who (IIRC) had been introduced as a former boyfriend of Margo's, shared the last name (Crawford) as her mother (pre-marriage, of course) and aunt. Did Margo ever note the coincidence? I can't recall.

Speaking of, what's the latest on the sinkhole at the WH? It never fails to irk me whenever certain individuals, including my own mother, suggest that Trump has somehow been anointed by God to be president. ("Really? Well, if God is pleased with Donald Trump as president, then I'm-a have to rethink this Christianity thing.")

He's STILL hot, if you ask me.

Agree. It always surprises me whenever a conservative speaks out in favor of LGBTQ rights. Like the time when Dick Cheney was asked about his views on same-sex marriage and he said, "Freedom means freedom for everyone," or something to that effect. Of course, I didn't know about Mary Cheney at the time, or her partner, but I was still taken aback when he said that. Same goes for learning about Kennedy's published argument in favor of the Obergerfell (sp?) case. That propagandist.... No matter what it is, if it's coming from the "other side," then he's against it.

That sounds like a really good concept for a teen-oriented soap. I always felt like that was the main point of "Freaks and Geeks," a show that I love and miss to this day.

Oh, well. We'll always have the jean jackets, bubblegum cards and zit removers to remember it by.

Yeah, he can't be bothered personally with that stuff right now. Not when there are still "illegals" to cage, rights to strip away and honeys on Fox News to ogle.

I think God would have a coronary if He ever heard the heathen actually praying. And I REFUSE to believe Trump is capable of ONE thought, let alone several. No, but I would expect him to pardon the shooter.

I can't speak for Titus, but I think "Tribes" was an interesting concept that was ultimately bogged down by a mediocre execution (not to mention, lack of network affiliate clearance). Same goes for "Swan's Crossing," which, despite its' brief run, developed a cult-ish following that I'll never understand.

Actually, I think you HAVE to play it straight, because any suggestion otherwise jeopardizes the audience's emotional investment. But I do feel like that kind of story -- "I'm pregnant, and I don't know how it happened!" -- needs a bigger payoff than an ovarian cyst. Maybe not another virgin birth, lol, but something bigger than a cyst.

Wait a minute -- I'm not advocating for another 9/11-like catastrophe. If I'm coming across that way, I apologize. However, it is my firm conviction that this tribalism existing between the left and right -- something that, IMO, has its roots in post-9/11 uncertainty and outright hatred toward Muslims -- has more than a little bit to do with everything that's unfolding before our very eyes; and that it's gonna take another, similar tragedy -- or so it seems, to me -- before we, as a nation, get to the end of the movie, where we join Billie Jean in burning the merchandise that Hubie Pyatt's dad's been selling. I just don't see any other way.

You know, it took a 9/11 to cause the divides that are engulfing this country...and it just might take another 9/11 to bring us all back together.

Well...maybe you're right. Damn. If we can't count on the President, Congress OR the Supreme Court to save us, who CAN we count on? The local and state governments? Good luck with that. History shows that they rarely behave in the best interests of its' citizens. (If the local and state gov'ts still had their way, African-Americans would still be slaves, with no voting privileges whatsoever.) I'm beginning to think that Wendy is right. Either we accept the death of the "American experiment" and embrace a return to tyrannical rule; or let those more progressively minded states cede from the union, and then stand back as the "Conservative States of America" disintegrates and begs the other side (and everybody else) to bail them out. But, either way, the U.S. as we know it is just so [!@#$%^&*] fucked.

Speaking of books, "Will You Please Go Now, Bernard Sanders?".

Ya know...this is pure speculation...but I would NOT be surprised if, after Trump announces Kennedy's replacement and he/she is quickly voted into SCOTUS, the GOP in Congress all-of-a-sudden ramps up talk of impeaching his ass. Because, after all, according to certain pundits, one major reason why they've stuck by Trump for so long (albeit reluctantly, in some cases), was because they needed him to pack the court with a right-leaning majority. Once that happens, I predict, they'll suddenly find him to be dispensable. Will it make any difference if they were to succeed on that front? No. The damage has been done -- damage, quite frankly, that'll take at least several generations to fix. But, at the very least, Trump could finally be put down like the rabid dog that he is, and we could get on with the business of healing the country's many wounds.

Yeah, I'm reading some articles about this now and...it don't look good. Roe v. Wade will most def be overturned -- or, if not overturned, then chipped away at until it's all but obsolete. Which means more "backroom jobs," more abortion pills being acquired through the black market, more women exposing themselves to potential injury and even death. And all because they see each baby as another, potential Republican vote. When it comes to voting rights and affirmative action, the court(s) of today apparently operate on the notion that it's no longer 1965; and that we, as a nation, have "come around" in our thinking about racial and ethnic inequalities. Of course, the average and truly ENLIGHTENED American knows that not to be the case. So, good luck, my potential grandkids, in getting those measures protecting minorities' voting rights back into law! I wish you well! And as for gay rights...well, you know, all I had ever hoped for was that same-sex couples BE allowed to marry -- because, hell, why should heterosexuals have all the misery? -- and that those marriages be recognized as legal by the government. Anything beyond that, I reasoned, was too pie-in-the-sky. So, the ONLY hope I have now is that SCOTUS will remain true to its history of "stare decisis," or whatever it's called, and not reverse THAT decision w/o "some compelling reason to do so" (per Vox), even as they allow businesses and such to discriminate the hell against gays and transgendered persons. (In other words -- fine, you won't bake cakes for queers, but they're still married in the eyes of the law, so eat it.)

Unfortunately, it WILL happen. She will place so many restrictions on the law that we'll STILL have to cross lines just to get access even to medicinal marijuana. I put nothing past the woman. I must admit I'm not too up on SCOTUS to know what Kennedy's retirement would mean. How bad is his decision to retire for us?