The Third Estate Sunday Review focuses on politics and culture. We're an online magazine. We don't play nice and we don't kiss butt. In the words of Tuesday Weld: "I do not ever want to be a huge star. Do you think I want a success? I refused "Bonnie and Clyde" because I was nursing at the time but also because deep down I knew that it was going to be a huge success. The same was true of "Bob and Carol and Fred and Sue" or whatever it was called. It reeked of success."
Though
advocates don’t describe them this way, anti-abortion policies clearly
aim to push women both into more unplanned pregnancies and down the
ladder of civic power. Likewise, anti-gay and anti-transgender policies
aim to push the growing group of young people who identify as LGBTQ back
into the closet, and into heterosexual relationships and more
pregnancies, planned and unplanned. It’s not a surprise that we found that in Texas, after the state imposed a six-week abortion in 2021, the 2022
teen birth rate (and specifically the rate of births to non-white
teens) rose for the first time in 15 years, though slightly, while
fertility rates for Hispanic women 25–44 (ages with greatest likelihood
of inability to travel for an abortion due to having children already at
home) rose markedly—foreshadowing post-Dobbs 2023 birth (and poverty) data to come, in Texas and many other states as well.
Ava and C.I. cover the attacks on BARBIE. By the way, I (Jim) changed the title on this about two hours after it went up from "The Attacks On BARBIE" to "Punching BARBIE."
Tuesday, January 30, 2024. Israeli forces invade a hospital and shoot
people, Nancy Pelosi is rightly called out, we look at the latest from
the campaigns of Marianne Williamson and Little Robbie Kennedy Junior,
and much more.
As we noted in yesterday's snapshot, Nancy Pelosi is using McCarthy tactics, is slandering in the same way Donald Trump does and she owes the people an apology. Amy Goodman (DEMOCRACY NOW!) notes "former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has urged the FBI to investigate pro-Palestinian protesters calling for a ceasefire in Gaza. Without sharing any evidence, Pelosi claimed on CNN
that the protesters may have ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Pelosi said, 'For them to call for a ceasefire is Mr. Putin’s message'."
Here's THE MAJORITY REPORT on Nancy's outrageous remarks.
Here's THE HUMANIST REPORT on Nancy's offensive remarks.
According to a December New York Times/Sienna poll, a
plurality of Americans—44 percent—±support a ceasefire, including 50
percent of women, 62 percent of 18–29 year-olds, 59 percent of Democrats
and 58 percent of those who voted for Biden in 2020.
Sixty-seven members of
the Democratic caucus in the House, including 13 members from Pelosi’s
California delegation have already joined the call. These include
centrists like Don Beyer, Debbie Dingell and Judy Chu, Pelosi allies
like Jan Schakowsky and Jared Huffman, as well as progressive leaders
like Pramila Jayapal, Barbara Lee, Jamie Raskin and members of the
“Squad.” They are joined by leading Senate Democrats including Elizabeth
Warren, Jeff Merkley, Chris Van Hollen and Dick Durbin.
The
White House has labeled such calls “repugnant and disgraceful.” Pelosi
attributes them to Putin’s machinations. But it is the White House and
the former Speaker that are out of touch with the country and the
world. In reality, the growing support is not a product of
Putin’s “financing” or of Russian disinformation but of people moved by
their conscience and their sense of decency.
Which leads
one to ask the former Speaker, to paraphrase Joseph Welch’s famous
query to Joe McCarthy in the 1954 Army-McCarthy hearing: “Have you no
sense of decency Madam?”
She
has no sense of decency. Few in the US government do as they rush to
cut off funding to UNRWA. From yesterday's DEMOCRACY NOW!
AMYGOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org. I’m Amy Goodman.
Palestinian officials and human rights groups are denouncing the move
by the United States and at least 12 other countries to temporarily
suspend funding to UNRWA — that’s the U.N. agency for Palestinian refugees — after Israel accused 12 UNRWA employees of helping Hamas stage the October 7th attack. Nine of the employees have been fired. UNRWA said two of the accused employees are dead.
UNRWA is one of the largest employers in
Gaza, with a staff of over 13,000. It provides aid to most of Gaza’s 2.3
million residents. The agency has long been targeted by Israel. Since
Israel’s assault on Gaza began, over 150 UNRWA staffers have been killed.
Francesca Albanese, U.N. special rapporteur on the Occupied
Palestinian Territories, said on social media, quote, “The day after
@ICJ concluded that Israel is plausibly committing Genocide in Gaza,
some states decided to defund UNRWA,
collectively punishing millions of Palestinians at the most critical
time, and most likely violating their obligations under the Genocide
Convention,” unquote.
Meanwhile, UNRWA chief Philippe Lazzarini
condemned the freezing of funds at a time when famine looms in Gaza. He
said, quote, “Palestinians in Gaza did not need [this] additional
collective punishment. This stains all of us,” he said. And the U.N.
Secretary-General António Guterres has urged donor nations to continue
supporting UNRWA.
For more, we’re going to Oslo, Norway, where we’re joined by Jan
Egeland, secretary general of the Norwegian Refugee Council. Norway has
decided to continue its funding of UNRWA.
Jan, thanks so much for being with us. Can you start off by
responding to the cutting off of funding at a time when, among other
things, Gaza is under bombardment and is on the edge of famine?
JANEGELAND: Yeah, it’s the worst possible reaction to these allegations that some — I mean, maybe a dozen — of the 13,000 UNRWA
aid workers betrayed our humanitarian principles of neutrality and
independence and participated in the horrific attacks on Israel. That,
however, was met immediately with the response of UNRWA
by, as you said, firing these staff and now having an independent
investigation. What the donors did — the U.S., the U.K., Germany, Italy,
Finland, Netherlands, Australia and some others did — was to cut all
aid to the children of Gaza, to the women in Gaza, to the completely
innocent there. It’s the worst possible move, at a time when this
trapped population is under bombardment. Do not punish the many innocent
for the sins of the few who did very wrong, it seems.
AMYGOODMAN:
Now it will be interesting to see if Israel hands over the evidence for
the U.N. to investigate this situation, because we’re talking about an
immediate cutoff by many of these nations, suspending weapons. I wanted
to read you a clip of the former Israeli official Noga Arbell, who said,
“It will be impossible to win the war if we do not destroy UNRWA, and this destruction must begin immediately.” The Prime Minister Netanyahu said there will be no UNRWA
in postwar Gaza. Your response, Jan Egeland? And talk about the
— you’re the head of large humanitarian aid group. How important is UNRWA to all of the groups, not to mention the people on the ground?
JANEGELAND: UNRWA is completely essential. I mean, it’s true that I lead the NRC,
Norwegian Refugee Council. We’re a large humanitarian group, across the
world. We’re on all sides of all conflict lines, for the displaced and
the refugees. And we’ve been in Gaza for two decades. We’ve been funded
all over the world by the United States and by 40 other donor nations
and international agencies.
In Gaza, we have to recognize that all of us combined other groups are not even close to be what UNRWA is for the people of Gaza. UNRWA
was the response to the creation of Israel and the 1948 War that
displaced so many of the original Palestinian population to Gaza, to the
West Bank and elsewhere. UNRWA was then
created to give them relief and works. Since then, there has not been a
political, peaceful settlement. And that is because the international
community has not been able to force the parties, Israel and the
Palestinians, to settle this conflict, and thereby we end up by having
humanitarian groups like, first and foremost, UNRWA provide for the population.
So, to undermine and undercut UNRWA as
extremists, which the Israeli government are doing, is basically to say,
“We’re going to punish the women and children, the innocent, on the
other side for what some extremists have done, in a situation of utter
turmoil and perpetuous conflict, that we’re not ourselves willing to try
to settle with talks on a future.” It’s very wrong.
And the international donors must stay with the humanitarian
organizations, like Norway did. Norway is a large donor, giving much
more per capita to Palestinians than any other donor. We stay with UNRWA,
and we say, “Good that you terminated all of those contracts and fired
these people, and good that there is an investigation, and then we’ll
draw the conclusions what we should do for the future.”
AMYGOODMAN: Jan Egeland, what evidence is there of Israel’s charges? Have they handed over the evidence?
JANEGELAND: As far as I know, it’s not been received by UNRWA
or by the U.N. investigators. I hope they will be received, so that
they can do a thorough investigation of this, very serious allegations. I
read about them in The New York Times. And if it’s true,
again, they betrayed all of our principles, really — neutrality,
impartiality, etc. — that is so important for us, who are unarmed
humanitarian workers in the crossfire around the world.
But, of course, no one who’s working across the Middle East can
guarantee that there are not people within our midst that may, in the
end, have hidden agendas. Palestinians cannot do that. Israelis cannot
do that. We know of many Israelis who have done very bad things in Gaza,
shooting at people with white flags. It’s documented and detailed.
They’ve even shot their own people with white flags. They have settler
organizations, Mafia-style settler organizations, displacing unarmed
women and children and families across the West Bank. Many of these are
recruited to the Israeli Defense Forces. They belong in jail, but they
are in the Israeli Defense Forces. No one can guarantee that there are
not problems. Therefore, they have to be investigated, and there has to
be action taken every time something happens. But don’t cut funding to
people in great need. It’s the worst possible response.
AMYGOODMAN:
Jan Egeland, I want to thank you for being with us, secretary general
of the Norwegian Refugee Council, speaking to us from Oslo. I’m Amy
Goodman. This is another edition of Democracy Now!
International aid agencies have said they are “deeply concerned and outraged” at the “reckless” decision by major donors to cut funding to a UN Palestinian aid agency after Israel accused some of its workers of taking part in Hamas’ 7 October attack.
“We
are shocked by the reckless decision to cut a lifeline for an entire
population by some of the very countries that had called for aid in Gaza
to be stepped up and for humanitarians to be protected while doing
their job,” the coalition of 21 agencies, including Oxfam, Save the
Children and ActionAid, said in a statement on Monday.
Amnesty International on Monday joined the growing global chorus
denouncing Israel's allies for suspending aid to the United Nations'
Palestinian refugee agency even as they continue to support the Israeli
military's war on the Gaza Strip, risking complicity in genocide.
Agnès Callamard, Amnesty's secretary-general and the former U.N. special rapporteur on extrajudicial killings, said
that while Israel's claim that a dozen staffers at the refugee agency
played a role Hamas' October 7 attack is "serious and must be
independently investigated," the "alleged actions of a few individuals
must not be used as a pretext for cutting off lifesaving assistance in
what could amount to collective punishment."
"Some of the very governments that announced they will cut off funds to
UNRWA over these allegations have, in the meantime, continued to arm
Israeli forces despite overwhelming evidence that these arms are used to
commit war crimes and serious human rights violations," said Callamard.
"Rushing to freeze funds for humanitarian aid, based on allegations
that are still being investigated, while refusing to even consider
suspending support for the Israeli military is a stark example of double
standards."
"Instead of suspending vital funding to those in need," Callamard
added, "states should be working to halt arms transfers to Israel and
Palestinian armed groups and pushing for an immediate and sustained
cease-fire and full humanitarian access to help alleviate devastating
suffering."
Gaza remains under assault. Day 116 of the assault in the wave that began in October. Binoy Kampmark (DISSIDENT VOICE) points out, "Bloodletting as form; murder as fashion. The ongoing campaign in Gaza
by Israel’s Defence Forces continues without stalling and restriction.
But the burgeoning number of corpses is starting to become a challenge
for the propaganda outlets: How to justify it? Fortunately for Israel,
the United States, its unqualified defender, is happy to provide cover
for murder covered in the sheath of self-defence." CNN has explained, "The Gaza Strip is 'the most dangerous place' in the world to be a child, according to the executive director of the United Nations Children's Fund." ABC NEWS quotes UNICEF's December 9th statement, ""The Gaza Strip is the most dangerous place in the world to be a child.
Scores of children are reportedly being killed and injured on a daily
basis. Entire neighborhoods, where children used to play and go to
school have been turned into stacks of rubble, with no life in them." NBC NEWS notes, "Strong majorities of all voters in the U.S. disapprove of President Joe
Biden’s handling of foreign policy and the Israel-Hamas war, according to the latest national NBC News poll.
The erosion is most pronounced among Democrats, a majority of whom
believe Israel has gone too far in its military action in Gaza." The
slaughter continues. It has displaced over 1 million people per the US
Congressional Research Service. Jessica Corbett (COMMON DREAMS) points out, "Academics and legal experts around the world, including Holocaust scholars, have condemned
the six-week Israeli assault of Gaza as genocide." The death toll of
Palestinians in Gaza is grows higher and higher. United Nations Women noted, "More than
1.9 million people -- 85 per cent of the total population of Gaza --
have
been displaced, including what UN Women estimates to be nearly 1 million
women and girls. The entire population of Gaza -- roughly 2.2 million
people -- are in crisis levels of acute food insecurity or worse." THE HINDUSTAN TIMES notes, "At least 26,083 Palestinians have been killed and 64,487 injured in
Israeli strikes on Gaza since Oct.7, the Gaza health ministry said in a
statement on Friday." AP has noted, "About 4,000 people are reported missing." And the area itself? Isabele Debre (AP) reveals, "Israel’s military offensive
has turned much of northern Gaza into an uninhabitable moonscape. Whole
neighborhoods have been erased. Homes, schools and hospitals have been
blasted by airstrikes and scorched by tank fire. Some buildings are
still standing, but most are battered shells." Kieron Monks (I NEWS) reports, "More than 40 per cent of the buildings in northern Gaza have been damaged or destroyed, according to a new study of satellite imagery
by US researchers Jamon Van Den Hoek from Oregon State University and
Corey Scher at the City University of New York. The UN gave a figure of 45 per cent of housing
destroyed or damaged across the strip in less than six weeks. The rate
of destruction is among the highest of any conflict since the Second
World War." Max Butterworth (NBC NEWS) adds, "Satellite images captured by Maxar Technologies on Sunday reveal three
of the main hospitals in Gaza from above, surrounded by the rubble of
destroyed buildings after weeks of intense bombing in the region by
Israeli forces."
ALJAZEERA notes this morning, "Israeli special forces dressed as doctors and nurses killed three
Palestinians inside Ibn Sina Hospital in Jenin in the occupied West Bank
on Tuesday." CNN adds, "The Palestinian Ministry of Health condemned the attack and the
targeting of a health center. They called on the UN General Assembly and
NGOs to provide the necessary protection for medical
treatment centers and emergency crews." THE PENINSULA offers this description of the events:
Israeli forces disguised as civilian women and medical workers
stormed a hospital Tuesday in the occupied West Bank, and opened fire
inside the wards of Ibn Sina Hospital in Jenin, killing three.
The Palestinian Health Ministry condemned the raid and
called on the international community to pressure Israel's military to
halt such operations in hospitals. A hospital spokesperson said there
was no exchange of fire, indicating that it was a targeted killing.
CNN notes, "Israeli shellingkilled dozens of people and wounded others east of Gaza City on Monday, the official Palestinian news agency WAFA said.CNN
is unable to independently verify the report. Elsewhere, the Palestine
Red Crescent said it lost contact with a team dispatched to rescue a
6-year-old girl trapped in a car in central Gaza after it was fired upon. The Red Crescent said the girl's father and four siblings were killed in the attack."
“They
are weak now, they always have diarrhea, their faces are yellow,”
Hanadi Gamal Saed El Jamara, 38, whose family was displaced from
northern Gaza, told CNN on January 9. “My 17-year-old daughter tells me
she feels dizziness, my husband is not eating.”
She tries to feed her kids at least once a day, she says, while tending to her husband, a cancer and diabetes patient.
As Gaza spirals toward full-scale famine,
displaced civilians and health workers told CNN they go hungry so their
children can eat what little is available. If Palestinians find water,
it is likely undrinkable.
When
relief trucks trickle into the strip, people clamber over each other to
grab aid. Children living on the streets, after being forced from their
homes by Israel’s bombardment, cry and fight over stale bread. Others
reportedly walk for hours in the cold searching for food, risking
exposure to Israeli strikes.
Even
before the war, two out of three people in Gaza relied on food support,
Arif Husain, the chief economist at the World Food Programme (WFP),
told CNN. Palestinians have lived through 17 years of partial blockade
imposed by Israel and Egypt.
Marianne
Williamson is running for the Democratic Party's presidential
nomination. She came in third in New Hampshire. Dean Phillips came in
second (Joe Biden won). Dean is not news. Dean has never been news.
He doesn't know how to make news. Marianne is news. She's making news
by going all out for Nevada and by going all out on social media. It'll
be interesting to see what happens in Nevada. It may be no different.
But it is news. For her latest YOUTUBE videos, click here. For her Twitter feed, click here. And click here for her campaign site.
What she's doing is news and should be covered as news. How's this
going to turn out? The media should be paying attention. It could be
very humiliating for her. It could shake up things. It's absolutely
something poli sci majors with an emphasis in campaign politics should
be following.
Marianne may end her campaign and
seek the Green Party's presidential nomination. I don't know that she
will. She didn't in 2020. But based on what we're about to quickly
talk about, I want to be clear that if she does the following does not
apply to her. She would have gone from a run in the Democratic Party to
a run for the Green Party's nomination.
Yes, it's time to talk about Little Junior and his Daddy issues that led to his embarrassing campaign.
Robert
Kennedy Junior started out running for the Democratic Party's
presidential nomination but no one wanted him. So then he announced he
was an independent candidate!
But he's had
trouble getting on the ballot -- he's only made the ballot for one
state. He and his corrupt cronies looked around and saw that he'd have
less requirements to make the ballot if he pretended to have a political
party so they'd just create a political party. As we noted weeks ago, that is called fraud.
Worse yet, it's intended fraud that can be proven because they were
stupid enough to publicly state their plans and goals. It's fraud.
Realizing that he will face challenges -- legal challenges -- on any
ballot that he makes due to some newly created 'political party,'
Junior's floating a new idea. He's thinking about pursuing the
presidential nomination of The Libertarian Party.
He seems to think he would be the obvious choice. Is Junior back on the heroin?
The
Libertarian Party is fine with losing as long as they feel they keep
their principles. They're in for the longterm and they're not lured by
celebrity. So there's not real need for them to get a 'name' on their
ticket.
Second, The Libertarian Party wants a
cease-fire. Junior has repeatedly rejected a cease-fire and has
championed the Isreali government's 'right' to carry out a slaughter.
Again, is he back on the drugs?
He
really needs to shut down his embarrassing campaign that has disgraced
the memories of his father and his uncle as well as every living member
of his family. See Ruth tonight for more on this topic.
In 1970, The Temptations reminded the world it was a "Ball of Confusion" and in 1982, Tina Turner reminded everyone again. Maybe we don't need a reminder in song currently because the message is clear on TV, in print and online currently?
Take the attack on BARBIE for example.
Or rather the attack on BARBIE's fans.
At THE ROOT, for example, Dustin J. Siebert screeches "The Salty White Woman Tears Shed Over the ‘Barbie’ Oscar Snubs Taste So Good." Poor pathetic Dusty. At the very least, based on the article, it should be "women." Didn't you learn pronoun and subject agreement in school? No wonder you've been fired from one outlet after another.
Or maybe it was your ignorance on the topics you cover -- such as the ignorance behind saying Margot Robbie and Greta Gerwig didn't deserve to be nominated for Best Actress or Best Director. On director nominations, the early indicator is the Directors Guild of America's nominations for Best Director of a Feature Film -- and, by the way, Greta got nominated by the DGA.
Dustbin tries to hide his dusty sexism by bringing up Lily Gladstone and hailing her as a first in the Best Actress category.
She is something and that is: A big mistake.
She doesn't belong in the category. There is no lead female role in KILLERS OF THE FLOWER MOON. That's per the way the role is (under)written and it's per the running time of the film. Gladstone appears in less than half the movie. She plays a supporting role and does not belong in the lead category.
Then there's the fact that Hattie McDaniel won an Academy Award. For Best Supporting Actress, yes. But she won for playing a slave in GONE WITH THE WIND. And that is a controversial decision to this day. No one questions that Hattie could act. Many question the role she won for. Many question her for taking it. That questioning started when the film was made. It has only grown more intense as the years have passed. A similar fate awaits KILLERS OF THE FLOWER MOON which uses a Native American narrative to prop up two Anglo White men and offers an embarrassing role for Lily Gladstone. She's not bad in the role. But like Hattie, the role and the film are far beneath her.
In his signature style of seemingly effortless meticulousness, and
creating all-consuming worlds out of the power dynamics in micro-cosmic
communities — Killers of the Flower Moon sees Scorsese lend his
craft to the horrific Osage Murders of the early 1900s. During the
‘Reign of Terror’, as it would come to be known, the Osage Native
community lost over 60 wealthy tribal members who were murdered for
their land claims.
This is the story of Killers of the Flower Moon. It’s a
story of how colonial capitalism and white American greed motivated the
murder of dozens of First Nations people. Since its debut, the film has
been promoted on the strength of its inclusiveness, activism, and by extension how Killers of the Flower Moon,
supposedly, advocates for the condemnation of the colonial settlers
responsible for the Osage Murders. Even the film’s co-lead, Lily
Gladstone, told Vulture the
film is not a white saviour story. And it’s true. Far from being a
story about white people nobly “saving” First Nations people, the film
is more akin to a slow-burn horror about the infinite cruelty of
colonial settlers.
Unfortunately, despite the efforts of Scorsese and his team to
involve the Osage in telling their story, the film adopts a
self-flagellating white gaze. At every turn, Killers of the Flower Moon
refuses to decentre whiteness. Instead, the film uses the gruesome
murder of First Nations people, not to advocate for Indigenous humanity,
but to showcase the lack of it in white people.
NATIVE MEDIA THEORY's Elias Gold offers this critique.
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY READER explains, "I am tired of seeing stories about Black, Brown, and Indigenous people
that center white feelings. I don't care if those feelings are guilt. I
don't need any more nuanced portrayals of the villainy of evil white
people of history. I need nuanced portrayals of the people they tried to
destroy."
We can't blame Dustbin too much, he may not have seen the movie. Most people skipped it.
You know what they didn't skip? BARBIE.
The reason so many are complaining about what they see as snubs is because so many people saw BARBIE.
Many people may not be aware of that. A sexist industry press tried to make it BARBIHEIMER last summer and sell them as the two biggest films. They were not.
Do people get that? The number one film of 2023, in terms of ticket sales, was BARBIE.
'B-b-b-but OPPENHEIMER was number two!'
Kids, it wasn't even number three.
Top five box office hits for 2023:
5) OPPENHEIMER
4) GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY VOL. 3
3) SPIDER-MAN: ACROSS THE SPIDER-VERSE
2) THE SUPER MARIO BROS. MOVIE
1) BARBIE
And it wasn't even close. BARBIE, with $656,239,421 in ticket sales made nearly double at the box office than OPPENHEIMER with $328, 159,000.
That the number one film of the year didn't get a Best Actress or a Best Director nomination is going to be something people comment on. A lot of people are going to comment -- mainly the many fans who paid to see the movie.
This happens every year with the nominations. People often complained, in more recent years, that Robert Downey Jr. didn't get nominated for any of his Iron Man performances and we happen to agree that was a huge oversight and snub.
Dustbin, working out his frustrations over being a failed writer, wants to reduce those complaining to White women (in the headline to "White woman"). Really? The first we heard of a complaint was from Michelle Yeoh who told us she hoped we'd write about it. We've known Michelle for years and she is an amazing actress but apparently more so than we ever knew because, until Dustbin typed his bad article, we never knew she was a White woman.
Dustbin also doesn't know anything about acting as he downgrades Margot's performance insisting that it's easy to play a doll. No, it's not. It's one of those roles -- like Peter Sellers plays in BEING THERE -- where one false note destroys everything. Ask Tom Hanks how difficult it was to play Forest. Margot excelled as Barbie.
Dustbin is a sexist pig. And they started oinking the moment the film came out. They were all over the left web eager to start attacking until, after COUNTERPUNCH's second or third article attacking the film, they got called on the sexism involved. Barbie doesn't throw grenades. Meaning? These same left outlets have never once felt the need to call out, for example, the live action GI JOE films.
But let a film star a woman -- let alone be directed by one -- and everyone's rushing to attack.
Take racist Bill Maher who pretended he wanted to ponder whether or not sexism was involved in Margo and Greta being shut out in the Best Actress and Best Director categories. Pretended?
Bill didn't want to get real about sexism. What shocked us was how many others didn't want to.
Whoopi Goldberg wanted people watching THE VIEW to know that some times you just don't get nominated. That is correct. And sometimes there are reasons for that.
But that was too much for Whoopi to grasp.
Maybe next time he doesn't want to address sexism, Bill can have Whoopi on and bring producer Lynda Obst with her.
THE ATLANTIC's Elaine Godfrey posted at HOLLYWOOD ELSEWHERE and included a Tweet from Lynda (which appears to have been deleted) in which Lynda dismissed the alleged snub for numerous reasons including "For one thing, name another comedy where the lead got nominated for an Oscar (always supporting) and that goes for straight comedy for directors too."
For starters?
This year, Emma Stone for POOR THINGS -- Best Actress nominee.
Need other examples? Margot Robbie for I, TONYA, Olivia Colman for THE FAVOURITE, Meryl Streep for FLORENCE FOSTER JENKINS, Meryl Streep for AUGUST: OSAGE COUNTY, Amy Adams for AMERICAN HUSTLE, Jennifer Lawrence for SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK, Annette Bening for THE KIDS ARE ALRIGHT. Meryl Streep for JULIE & JULIA, Meryl Streep for THE DEVIL WORE PRADA, Annette Bening for BEING JULIA, Diane Keaton for SOMETHINGS GOTTA GIVE, Renee Zellweger in BRIDGET JONE'S DIARY, Gwyneth Paltrow for SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE, Helen Hunt for AS GOOD AS IT GETS . . .
We could go on and on.
For those listed, we used women who were also nominated for Golden Globes for the same film and nominated in the comedy category (GG nominates best comedy or musical performance and best drama performance) and we did so because Lynda dismissed "dramadies" as an exception. So, for example, Cate Blanchet is not noted for comedy-drama BLUE JASMINE despite her AA nomination since the Globes put her in the drama category. The same with others -- including Felicity Huffman for TRANSAMERICA.
Were you drunk, Lynda, when you Tweeted that nonsense? It only got worse in her Tweet, "I put the first female lead in a blockbuster (Jodie in CONTACT) but didn't expect applause."
Good. Good that you didn't expect applause for that because you didn't do that.
Of living actresses, probably Julie Andrews holds the claim to being the first female lead in a blockbuster with THE SOUND OF MUSIC. Then there's Barbra Streisand in FUNNY GIRL. PRIVATE BENJAMIN starring Goldie Hawn was a blockbuster (and Goldie produced it) as was 9 TO FIVE with Jane Fonda, Lily Tomlin and Dolly Parton (and Jane produced it). In fact, there are many blockbusters starring a female lead. Now, in the 90s, a blockbuster became a film that made $100 million or more in ticket sales. Even with that measurement, Lynda's lying. CONTACT came out in the summer of 1997 and made $100 million domestically. That same summer? Julia Roberts' MY BEST FRIEND'S WEDDING came out and made $126 million domestically. And before that? Julia's PELICAN BRIEF made $100 million domestically (1993), SLEEPING WITH THE ENEMY made $101 million domestically (1991), PRETTY WOMAN made $178 million domestically (1990). And, by the way, before 1997's CONTACT, Jodie Foster was already the lead in THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS (1991) which made $130 million domestically.
So you're embarrassing claim that you pioneered something when you didn't? Let's hope it was a drunken boast.
Was it a snub or not? Failing to nominate Margot and Greta?
We've listed solid reasons why it could be seen as a snub. We haven't called it one. An argument can be made either way. And those rushing to insist it was no snub? They came in ready to attack the film, did you notice that? They were excessively eager to attack a film that pleased a lot of little girls and women. It's interesting how the pig class always runs forward to oink-oink-oink when, even just one movie -- even just one -- appears to cater to women.
The greed of the streamers. If you haven't noticed 2023
was the drop off in new content. We'll see even less this year. Yet
the prices continue to soar. And when not increasing their prices, they
seem to be all trying to add advertising. Marco Quiroz-Gutierrez (FORTUNE) reports:
Amazon spends billions of dollars every year on
programming for its Prime Video platform and now it wants customers to
pay up or get used to seeing ads on their favorite shows.
On
Monday, the tech giant made ad-supported streaming the default on Prime
Video for its more than 200 million subscribers. The company originally announced
the plan in September, saying that it was needed, “to continue
investing in compelling content and keep increasing that investment
...”
Maybe it
wouldn't be so bad if it was another streamer? No, not MAX. MAX is the
worst streamer that has nothing to offer but those ridiculous and
crappy shows from Chip and Joanna and the other basement dwellers.
AMAZON really doesn't offer that much original content. Not any worth
watching. We watch REACHER and we're watching EX PATS. If AMAZON
serves up two series worth watching a year, that's considered epic for
them.
Maybe it's also the fact that, unlike HULU, AMAZON didn't start out with ads. Want to skip them? Quiroz-Gutierrez explains:
Amazon
claimed in its original announcement that Prime Video will show fewer
ads than regular TV or other streaming services, but those who want to
avoid them altogether will have to pay an additional $2.99 per month on top of the $14.99 monthly fee that already exists.
Expect even more advertising to come in AMAZON's future.
Need a scary thought?
How long exactly is AMAZON's future?
It
will go the way of many brick and mortar stores one day. When that day
happens, do we kiss goodbye all the streaming films we've bought from
AMAZON? All the music? All the books for KINDLE?
Here are five things we like to add to a warm, just popped, bowl of popcorn.
1)
Taco seasoning. You won't believe how good this tastes. Start with 1
tablespoon and mix into popcorn. If it's for you, next time add a
little more.
2) Garlic
salt. If you're a garlic lover, this is wonderful to use in place of
regular or sea salt (we love sea salt ourselves).
3) Honey heated for about a minute in the microwave.
4) Cinnamon fan? We love to dash cinnamon on top of our popcorn.
5) Chocolate chips. Sweetened. Let them melt some in the still hot popcorn.
In
addition, we swear by Kernel Seasons -- a series of popcorn spices such
as Dill Pickle, Ranch, Nacho Cheddar, Cinnamon Roll, Ranch, Carmel
Corn, etc.
There's
the factual issue of "but split." Farrah Fawcett and Lee Majors did
not split in 1982 -- ("they divorced" which implies they split then) --
Farrah Fawcett and Ryan O'Neal became a couple in 1979. Or take this on
Jane Fonda and Roger Vadim, "They were together for eight years and had one child together, but split in 1973."
Uh. No. They split in 1969. Jane Fonda was seeing, among others,
Donald Sutherland in 1970. So, no, Roger and Jane weren't a supercouple
of the 70s. As for the 1973 divorce? Jane was pregnant with Tom
Hayden's child and married him three days after the divorce was final
(January 19, 1973). Or this on Goldie Hawn and Mark Harmon, "The couple married in 1976, but by 1982 they were done." No, they were doing in August of 1980 when Goldie filed for divorce. We could do that all day long.
But
what really puts the WTF into this article from ELLE would be sentences
like this from their blurb for Diane Keaton and Warren Beatty, "The couple began dating in 1978 and he even casted her in his 1981 film, Reds." Casted? He casted her? Cast. He cast her.
And runner up for the week produced this sentence, "On
stage during a Monday appearance at the University of California,
Berkeley’s law school, the first Latina justice spoke to the demands of
the gig's demands at her age since she was appointed by former President
Barack Obama in 2009."
The demands of the gig's demands? Googling should provide you with the runner up's outlet and name.
On Monday, the rock band announced the Royal Flush tour featuring special guest Cheap Trick.
Royal Flush will
see Heart perform across North America and Europe. The tour kicks off
April 20 in Greenville, S.C., and concludes Sept. 22 in Morrison, Colo.
Heart's going back out on the road!
Which means we should celebrate with our dream setlist from the band.
Joseph Ax (REUTERS) reports, "As
many as one in 10 hate crimes in the U.S. take place at schools - from
kindergarten through college - according to an FBI report released on
Monday, with Black students the most frequent targets, followed by
Jewish and LGBTQ victims. Schools
were the third most frequent location for hate crimes - after
residences and roadways or alleys - from 2018 to 2022, even though most
schools experienced months of closures during the 2020-2021 academic
year due to the coronavirus pandemic."
Which
is why schools should teach real African-American history (and not the
garbage that racists like Ron DeSantis come up with). Which is why Moms
For Bigotry help no one and actually do outrageous harm. OUT TV.
And
let's include on the list of hate merchants that ugly, sour faced,
bulging gut (not even control top pantyhose can hold her gut in) Anya
Parampil. She's a sycophant of that Mother Tucker Carlson and so
enjoyed ridiculing trans people that she kept a Tweet mocking
transgender people pinned to the top of her trashy Twitter feed for over
six months.
These people
do real harm. Toss in John Stauber as well. He pretends he's of the
left while reposting Tweets from the hate group Gays Against Groomers.
To be really clear, it's not just bad for African-Americans and LGBTQ+ people, it's bad for a lot of things.
For
example, John Stuber and Anya pretend to care about Palestinians. But
if they truly cared, they wouldn't be hate merchants. They'd grasp that
their disgusting attacks on others makes it hard for people to join
them in actions.
They are disgusting.
This is a list of people who attack the LGBTQ+ community. They're hate merchants and should be avoided at all costs.
1) Marjorie Taylor Green
2) Ron DeSantis
3) Lauren Boebert
4) Anthony Monteiro
5) J.K. Rowling
6) Kristi Noem
7) Kim Reynolds
8) Marco Rubio
9) Rand Paul
10) Tucker Carlson
11) Greg Abbott
12) Ron Johnson
13) Todd Aiken
14) Doug Lamborn
15) Dan Burton
16) Candace Cameron
17) Kirk Cameron
18) Jonathan Turley
19) Tulsi Gabbard
20) John Stauber
21) Kid Rock
22) Matt Taibbi
23) Riley Gaines
24) Anya Parampil
25) Matt Walsh
26) Gregg Abbott
27) (Butt Ugly) Moms For Liberty (aka Moms For Bigotry)
We should start responding to Zionists’ and their apologists’ accusations of antisemitism for us wanting to stop genocide in #Gaza by calling them Islamophobic. Because they are.
Lauren Boebert came in fifth in her new district's straw poll. To which she replied: "Who'd make a pole out of straw?" "This is election interference - I came in 7th!" "I did pretty great with that pole at Beetlejuice!" "Why did they ask my kids?" pic.twitter.com/34PXsfNlBU
