Jump to content

The Politics Thread


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Members

At the risk of undercutting the entire discussion, I have to be honest--I'm indifferent to the plight of both of these women, especially when I dig into the statistics that almost 5,000 people died in Puerto Rico due to neglect by the U.S. in the aftermath of Hurricane Maria (I almost wrote Katrina) and from what I'm reading and hearing from friends in Latin America, drug trafficking has gone up in the last year after decreasing steadily over the last several years (the U.S. has basically absented itself from action in helping secure key ports, including those connected to Miami/S. Florida). That's not even including the opioid crisis.

 

I don't use, nor do I believe in using the word in question but honestly, if this was a woman who was completely marginalized I would certainly care but I can't claim any outrage over someone who just got multiple Chinese trademarks and continues to feather her nest at the public's expense, while others struggle to survive. 

This might sound coarse but I don't really care what either of these women's plights are--they are capable of fending for themselves.

 

And then there's this.

 

Edited by DramatistDreamer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 45.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Vee

    6816

  • DRW50

    5988

  • DramatistDreamer

    5521

  • Khan

    3458

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

What happens when we take SNAP away from drug offenders. No surprise they end up back in prison.  Watching our society get worse by the day is so disheartening.

 

https://theintercept.com/2018/06/01/food-stamps-drug-conviction-snap-welfare/

That's the real issue to me.  I could GAF about Ivanka.  We saw what she did in Israel. We saw that picture she posted of herself with her baby when other mothers were seeing their children ripped away via her father's policies.  Only an evil, selfish person could do that. Anyone who still thinks she is in any way interested in being a moderating force is kidding themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Sam Bee was the first person to call out her fellow white women for voting for Trump so she's going to have to work pretty hard to lose my support. I find it interesting how Bee like Michelle Wolf after the WHCD seem to draw fire when rightly calling out their fellow white women for being complicit. I feel like there's a whole "race traitor" element to this coupled with a smackdown by the patriarchy but since I'm not in the demo I can't quite wrap my head around it.

 

I keep thinking of the Blackish episode dealing with the election where Dre discovers that his white woman coworker voted for Trump and he said that he was surprised that she would betray the sisterhood. She responded, "White women aren't sisters. We hate each other." When you look at it through that lens, a lot of what happened in 2016 and beyond makes more sense.

 

 

 

I consider the response to Puerto Rico one of the saddest, lowest things I have ever witnessed in my life. It's heartbreaking.

 

I keep thinking about the people on the left who swung from Bernie to Trump ostensibly because they wanted to "shake things up" and/or "burn it all down." Puerto Rico is the result of that kind of thinking. Suffering, death, and a generation lost because of instability and displacement. (See also: Katrina)

 

FYI, I'm hoping to visit Puerto Rico when Lin-Manuel Miranda brings "Hamilton" to the island, if not before.

Edited by marceline
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Is it really being complicit when you are fully on board? Republican women aren't just complicit at this point, imo. That's letting them off too easily.  They have completely opposing values to the other half of our sex and race and they are fighting hard for those values.  That's one of the reasons there really isn't a sisterhood of white women and never will be.

 

We may be oppressed, but not in the same way that black women are. I'm taking about right now, never mind historically.The people who oppress white women are in large part members of our family and people that we have to make families with. It's a different dynamic. It's not as harsh as when society as a whole is trying to break you down, so we don't have to band together within the group. We band into cliques within the larger group. 

 

Like I told Khan awhile back, to say something like "white women hate each other" is almost meaningless.  I doubt that I'm unique in the fact that I rarely (before Trump) ever thought of myself as a white woman. That's what privilege is. When I see another white woman I don't think there's a member of my group. I think there's another person. She's basically another stranger to me.  It's like when I was in an all women's college and a visiting professor said "I hardly ever thought about the fact that I'm a man until I got here." What he meant was that in his day to day interactions he never had to think about being a man until he was so outnumbered. When I see another white woman I certainly do not think I've automatically found a "sister" although over the years I have found some.

 

As I've gotten older I feel a certain sisterhood with all women, but I never expect it to be returned.  I go to a female doctor, lawyer and dentist. I would not vote for anything that harms women as a whole, even if it benefited me personally.

 

As for Samantha Bee, I'm not sure this is about white women being upset that she "betrayed" one of our own. For white women on the left Ivanka isn't one of our own. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I'd say a lot of it is the way it was done. Wolf chose to talk about eye makeup, compare Sanders to a gym coach (often stereotyped as ugly) and compare Sanders to a character on the Handmaid's Tale who is styled in a way that draws ugly comments about her appearance. The response is to say, "No one talked about her appearance, only conservatives brought up her appearance," but framing the jabs against Sanders that way is opening up a debate about appearance. Wolf made another comment outside of the show where she jabbed that Sanders "finally gets to go to prom" which is in the same vein - and is another jab that has been used against many women for years.

 

Bee and Wolf used misogynistic framing choices that are used against all women, even as we were simultaneously meant to believe that it was no big deal because it was only about one woman and had nothing to do with misogyny or sexism.

 

When the left makes the debate about how ugly someone is, or about incest, or about how great it is to call women c***s, then it makes them feel good, but it doesn't really do much else. 

Edited by DRW50
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Wow, that sounds like that could be an extraordinary trip! 

TBH, that would be so hard for me to do.  My family (both sides) hails from the Caribbean and has experienced the devastation of a hurricane in the past.  I grew up with Puerto Ricans, have friends who are originally from Puerto Rico, many of their families still live on the island. 

 

I do imagine that LMM will bring some much needed focus and hopefully some much needed joy to PR. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

My college roommate was from Puerto Rico. I fell in love with her stories about her time on the island. I wasn't sure about visiting because I was afraid of engaging in disaster tourism but upon further research I learned that they want every tourist they can get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

This is what I've been trying to say to people who are shocked at the separation of migrant children from their parents at the border-- America has a long and recent history of ripping children away from their parents.  In some groups, this practice was allowed to continue into the late 1970s. 

This is not distant history!

 

The Long History of Child-Snatching

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/04/us/politics/supreme-court-sides-with-baker-who-turned-away-gay-couple.html

 

As many expected the Supreme Court sided with the Colorado baker who refused to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple.

 

The ruling was narrower than I thought it would be (probably why it got 7-2 instead of 5-4), which will open up even more anti-gay laws and legal challenges, but maybe means Kennedy doesn't want to go too far.

 

Of course Kennedy could be retiring this term, or the next one, and whoever Trump chooses to replace him will not be likely to hesitate at gay hate.

 

Just another reason I hope Democrats win the Senate, unlikely as it is, and start blocking as many nominees as they can until 2021.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • I also wonder if it was considered controversial at the time to show a morally corrupt doctor?(another character troupe for Agnes Nixon, the upstanding male citizen who is hiding secrets back at home) Up until the early 1970s, prime-time would very rarely tell stories about the private lives of doctors, because advertisers tended to shy away from such content. @robbwolff -- so is this wrong that Ruth dated David before marrying Joe?  Dr. David Thornton is a fictional character from the ABC daytime soap opera All My Children, portrayed by Paul Gleason from 1976 to 1978.  He was introduced as a respected physician in Pine Valley, presenting himself as a widower to his colleagues at the hospital. This facade, however, concealed a darker truth: his wife, Edna Thornton, was alive, and he was leading a double life. David’s character is defined by manipulation and secrecy, as he maintained a carefully curated public image while engaging in deceitful and criminal behavior in his personal life. His relationships were marked by control and betrayal, particularly in his marriage to Edna and his romantic entanglements with other women. David’s charm and professional status allowed him to navigate Pine Valley’s social circles, but his actions revealed a calculating and ruthless nature. Career David was a doctor at Pine Valley Hospital, where he was well-regarded by his peers for his medical expertise. His professional life provided him with a veneer of respectability, which he exploited to mask his personal misdeeds. However, his career was not a central focus of his storyline; instead, it served as a backdrop to his personal schemes. His position at the hospital gave him access to resources, such as the drug digitalis, which he later used in his attempt to murder his wife. David’s professional life unraveled as his criminal actions came to light, tarnishing his reputation in the medical community. Personal Relationships and Family David’s family and romantic relationships were fraught with tension and deception, shaping much of his narrative arc: Edna Thornton (Wife): David was married to Edna Thornton, with whom he had a daughter, Dottie. To his colleagues, he claimed Edna was deceased, allowing him to pursue other relationships without suspicion. In reality, David was plotting to kill Edna, motivated by his desire to be free of her and possibly to gain financial or personal freedom. He began poisoning her with digitalis, a heart medication, which caused her to experience heart pains. Edna was unaware of David’s true intentions until after his death, when the truth about his poisoning scheme was revealed. Dottie Thornton (Daughter): David and Edna’s daughter, Dottie Thornton, was a significant character in All My Children. Portrayed by Dawn Marie Boyle (1977–1980) and later Tasia Valenza (1982–1986), Dottie was raised primarily by Edna. David’s neglectful and manipulative behavior extended to his daughter, as he showed little genuine care for her well-being. Dottie’s life was impacted by her father’s actions, particularly after his death, when Edna became a wealthy widow. Dottie later married Thaddeus “Tad” Martin in 1985, though their marriage ended in divorce in 1986, and she suffered the loss of an unborn child with Tad. Ruth Parker (Fiancée, 1976): David was engaged to Ruth Parker in 1976, furthering his pattern of deceit since he was still married to Edna. His engagement to Ruth, who was also involved with Jeff Martin, highlighted David’s willingness to manipulate romantic partners for his own gain. The engagement did not lead to marriage, as David’s true intentions and double life began to surface. Christina “Chris” Karras (Lover, 1978): In 1978, David began a romantic relationship with Dr. Christina “Chris” Karras, a fellow physician. This affair added another layer of complexity to his web of lies, as Chris was unaware of his marriage to Edna and his poisoning scheme. After David’s death, Chris was initially accused of his murder due to their relationship and her access to medical resources. However, Jeff Martin’s investigation cleared her name by proving David’s death was caused by his own actions. Parents: David’s parents are unnamed in the source material, and both are noted as deceased. No further details are provided about their influence on his life or their role in his backstory. Death David Thornton’s death in 1978 was a dramatic and fitting conclusion to his villainous arc, brought about by his own treachery. Intent on killing Edna to escape their marriage, David had been secretly administering digitalis to her, causing her heart issues. In a twist of fate, their daughter, Dottie, innocently switched Edna’s drink with David’s during one of his poisoning attempts. Unaware that the drink was laced with a lethal dose of digitalis, David consumed it and suffered a fatal heart attack. His death was initially investigated as a possible murder, with Chris Karras as the prime suspect due to her relationship with David and her medical knowledge. However, Dr. Jeff Martin conducted a toxicology screen on David’s body, which revealed that the digitalis poisoning was the cause of both Edna’s heart pains and David’s death. This evidence exonerated Chris and exposed David’s plan to kill his wife, cementing his legacy as a tragic and self-destructive figure. Impact and Legacy David Thornton’s storyline, though relatively short-lived (1976–1978), was impactful due to its intensity and the ripple effects on other characters. His death left Edna a wealthy widow, altering her and Dottie’s circumstances and setting the stage for further drama, including Edna’s manipulation by conman Ray Gardner. David’s actions also strained relationships among other Pine Valley residents, particularly through his engagement to Ruth Parker and affair with Chris Karras, which intersected with Jeff Martin’s storyline. His character exemplified the classic soap opera archetype of a charming yet duplicitous villain whose downfall is precipitated by his own hubris. Additional Notes Portrayal: Paul Gleason’s performance as David Thornton brought a compelling intensity to the role, making the character memorable despite his brief tenure. Gleason’s ability to portray both charm and menace suited David’s dual nature as a respected doctor and a scheming husband. Storyline Context: David’s arc occurred during the early years of All My Children, a period when the show focused on intricate personal dramas and moral dilemmas. His poisoning plot and double life were emblematic of the show’s penchant for high-stakes interpersonal conflict. Lack of Additional Family Details: Beyond Edna and Dottie, no other family members (such as siblings or extended relatives) are mentioned in the source material, limiting the scope of his familial connections. Conclusion Dr. David Thornton was a multifaceted antagonist in All My Children, whose life was marked by professional success, personal deception, and a fatal miscalculation. As a doctor, he wielded authority and respect, but his secret plan to murder his wife, Edna, revealed a cold and calculating core. His relationships with Edna, Dottie, Ruth Parker, and Chris Karras were defined by manipulation, and his death by accidental self-poisoning was a poetic end to his schemes. David’s legacy in Pine Valley lived on through Edna’s newfound wealth and Dottie’s subsequent storylines, making him a pivotal figure in the show’s early narrative. His story remains a classic example of soap opera drama, blending betrayal, tragedy, and retribution.
    • The only blonde I see is one of the actual women staring at first & then screaming & running later.  DAYS: Vivian's manservant Ivan is in a long curly red wig. 

      Please register in order to view this content

      Y&R: long straight black wig is the actor Peter Barton whose character name I am blanking on.   
    • I very much liked office Cleary and the actress who portrayed her (as you say, Mary Peterson).  A shame her turn didn't evolve into a contract role.   BTW, does anyone know the timeframe/years that Betty Rae served as casting director?  If i understand correctly, she not only led the effort for contract roles, but also for shorter 13- and 26-week roles.  IMO, GL had LOTS of very well-casted, limited roles, too. I'm surprised the actors throughout the soap industry, and especially P&G actors, have not assembled a book or something similar, praising Rae.  Each actor could write a few paragraphs or a page of text describing his or her experience.
    • No. Ruth had an extramarital affair with David while married to Joe.
    • I'm not sure I agree with Bernstein's children on that. Bernstein's life and activism here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonard_Bernstein#Social_activism_and_humanitarian_efforts
    • Thursday & Friday's episodes were excellent. The build-up was most definitely worth the wait (2 months). TMG, I can't give her enough accolades. AM, was also absolutely incredible. I think the fallout is going to have a ripple effect. The little clues that have been dropped,  hopefully, will weave seamlessly to reveal even bigger bombshells for the Dupree's and Martin.
    • Thanks, msn drives me nuts on the one hand but on the other hand their headlines appeal to me. And, I just don't do FoxNews.   
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy