Monday, February 22, 2021

Truest statement of the week

But in the end, they did what their party always does. The plan was to kick Trump while he was down, repeat ad nauseum how bad he is and distract attention from their collusion in the duopoly. Democrats knew they wouldn’t get the two-thirds majority vote in the Senate that was needed to convict. After weeks of hyperbole and a vote to call witnesses, they chose not to in exchange for reading a statement into the record. They made a mockery of claims that the sky was falling.

Cheap praise was the order of the day. Black Capitol police officer Eugene Goodman’s name is now a household word simply because he did what he was paid to do. He led an angry mob away from senators he is charged with protecting. As a result of doing his job he has been lauded by Congress and the media. He was already invited to escort Kamala Harris to the inauguration but the accolades don’t stop. 

The New York Times calls him a “reluctant hero ” but pours on the propaganda just in case Goodman continues to demur. We learn that he served in the army in Iraq, where he was sent to kill people. (That is the point of the military after all.) According to the Times he was “calm, cool, and collected under fire,” “serious and focused,” yet “quick with a joke,” and that his commanding officer “trusted my life with him.” He and others in the Capitol police force will be given the Congressional Gold Medal, an obscure honor but now useful to the fake opposition as they use bait and switch to cover their tracks.

Meanwhile, the stimulus with its inadequate help for working people winds its way through the process. No wonder democracy is said to be on its last legs. It certainly is, but not because Trump loving yahoos overran the capitol building.

-- Margaret Kimberley, "Freedom Rider: Impeachment Theater" (BLACK AGENDA REPORT).

Truest statement of the week II

Pelosi has added to concerns over transparency and accountability with her selection of retired General Russel Honoré to lead an investigation of Capitol security. She acted without consulting others — and few Republicans would have supported her choice, since Honoré is a longtime critic of Trump and various Republicans. He appeared immediately to reach conclusions on responsibility for the attack that paralleled Pelosi’s views.

In an interview two days after the attack, without any facts to support his conclusions, Honoré declared on MSNBC that “I think once this all gets uncovered, it was complicit actions by Capitol Police” and “people need to go to jail.” He condemned Sund as “complicit along with the sergeant-at-arms in the House and the Senate.” Responding to calls to expel Sen. Josh Hawley and others for allegedly supporting the riot, Honoré tweeted: “This little peace [sic] of shit with his @Yale law degree should be run out of DC and Disbarred ASAP @HawleyMO @tedcruz aaa hats [sic]. These @Yale and @Harvard law grads is high order white privilege.”

This from the man who Pelosi appointed to give an unbiased, nonpartisan review. Of course, for many Americans, any inquiry may seem unnecessary. The second Trump impeachment drilled home a narrative that the riot was primarily the fault of one man, Donald Trump, and by implication not the fault of others. Pelosi told MSNBC’s Joy Reid that Trump should be charged as “an accessory” to murder “because he instigated that insurrection that caused those deaths and this destruction.”

If framing scandals in Washington is an art form, then Pelosi is our resident Rembrandt.

-- Jonathan Turley, "'A Date Which Will Live In Infamy': The Other Scandal From The Capitol Riot" (JONATHANTURLEY.ORG).

A note to our readers

Hey -- 

Monday morning still Sunday here on the West Coast.   

Let's thank all who participated this edition which includes Dallas and the following:

The Third Estate Sunday Review's Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess and Ava,
Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude,\

Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man,

C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review,
Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills),
Mike of Mikey Likes It!,
Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz),
Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix,
Ruth of Ruth's Report,
Wally of The Daily Jot,
Trina of Trina's Kitchen, 
Stan of Oh Boy It Never Ends,
Isaiah of The World Today Just Nuts,
and Ann of Ann's Mega Dub.

And what did we come up with? 


-- Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess, Ava and C.I.

Editorial: Ongoing protests in Iraq

As Mustafa Habib notes, protests continue in Iraq.

Protesters of #Nasiriyah surround the governorate building
Quote Tweet
بالفيديو : تصعيد في مظاهرات ذي قار اليوم المطالبة باقالة او استقالة محافظ ذي قار .

This is the protest movement that broke out in October of 2019 and it is still going strong.

TV: Back into the cesspool

That's where HBO has taken the country -- back into the cesspool.


Mia Farrow and her daughter Dylan, hungry publicity whores, are back.  With a bad documentary entitled ALLEN V. FARROW.   Back again.  And the first question to ask is the most important one:  Why?

Because Dylan's a White girl.  

Because Dylan's a White girl we get a four-part mini-series about what she claims happened back in 1992.  What she claims.

It's the '00s all over again with the media ignoring the disappearances of African-American girls to instead have the entire nation fretting over the missing White girl.   It's so ingrained into the culture, this discrimination,  that both FAMILY GUY and AMERICAN DAD have episodes riffing on it.

And now comes HBO.  Help us out, how many documentaries did HBO do on Aiyana Jones?  Police shot and killed her during a raid.  She was seven-years-old.  She also wasn't White.  So HBO doesn't give two s**ts.  Where's the HBO documentary on Breonna Taylor?  That young woman was 26-years-old when police killed her.  Where's the HBO documentary on that?  Oh, wait, Breonna Taylor is African-American.

HBO and Dylan and Mia only care about White girls.

Do you doubt it?

If it's time to make a documentary about Mia Farrow's family, it's time to make a documentary about Soon-Yi.  And that includes how Mia beat her and abused her.  Even Mia admits to some of the abuse.  Wah-wah, she beat her because she was jealous Mia used to 'explain' and the press would just write it up as if that's normal.

Especially coming from a grown woman notorious for throwing herself at every man she could and being enraged when so many rejected her.  She still turns crimson when anyone has the nerve to laugh at her failed attempt to steal Mike Nichols from Diane Sawyer in the 90s.  

America knows that Mia beat her daughter Soon-Yi, it's even noted, Mia beating Soon-Yi, in the New York State Supreme Court verdict written by the judge.  If only Soon-Yi were White, the American media might give a damn, right?

So much has to be ignored.

Mia, you may remember, used a Golden Globes TV presentation to start the latest wave of attacks on her former lover Woody Allen.  She and her loopy child Ronan took to Twitter to protest . . . forgetting to note that the Golden Globes tribute that she was so 'offended' by actually took place with her permission: She had approved the clips of her from Woody's movies that were used in the tribute.

It's been non-stop since then.  And we were all screeched at that it didn't matter what Mia did.  Forget the public record, it didn't matter -- they insisted.

Mia stood by Roman Polanski and defended him -- an admitted child rapist.  

"It has no bearing!!!!!"

That lie had to be repeated over and over.

Yes, it does have bearing.  She dismissed the accusations against Polanski but she wanted sympathy for her daughter.

Does that really sound like someone whose child has been abused or does it actually sound, yes, like someone who uses abuse charges when they're handy.

Mia and Dylan have a molester in the family but we're not supposed to note that either.  Too bad for the White girls but that molester is actually back in the news.  Roger Friedman (SHOWBIZ 411) notes:

This is not in the HBO doc “Allen vs. Farrow,” directed by Kirby Dick and Amy Ziering. It’s the forgotten story of Mia’s brother, John Charles Viller-Farrow, convicted child molester who spent 7 years in Maryland’s Jessup Correctional Institution for abusing two little boys over an 8 year period.

Farrow was given a 25 year sentence, which was turned into 10 years. He served only 7, even though he destroyed the lives of two young men who have to live with what he did to them. He was released on February 12, 2020.

Mia Farrow never acknowledges this happened. Neither does Ronan Farrow. Or any of their defenders. Woody Allen was never formally accused of anything, arrested or charged in the case of his adopted daughter, Dylan.

But Mia’s brother was successfully prosecuted and imprisoned for sex crimes. This fact alone upends the so-called “devastating” documentary that paints Woody as a mastermind criminal.

They pretend don't they -- Mia, Ronan and Dylan -- that they care when children are abused.

But not one of them has ever spoken of brother John despite his being a huge part of their lives both before and during the time he molested two young boys.  

To make the Farrows  look good, you have to ignore reality.

In the documentary, we get to see Dylan on videotape.  Mia, instead of taking her to the police, decided the 'legal' thing to do was to tape her daughter.  You don't see it on the documentary but there are a lot of starts and stops in that taping as Dylan was coached or, if you prefer, steered.  

Not mentioned in the documentary is that this video ended up at a TV station.  How did it end up there?  Only Mia had a copy.  As Soon-Yi noted in 1992, "I was not surprised that Mia made a videotape of Dylan saying these terrible things as I think the motive is obvious, but I was stunned that the tape would somehow find its way to the TV news."

It's such a curious outcome -- putting her daughter Dylan on blast --  and one that the filmmakers avoid addressing.

It's curious how people react as well.  We were honestly going to ignore this crap.  We'd never noted the documentary here though we were aware of it.  The only reason we're noting it now is NPR.  They claimed -- no link to trash, no matter how hilarious it is -- that Mia and Woody met in 1979 when they were both stars.  (Per Mia's own mouth, they didn't go on their first date until April  17, 1980 -- so everyone citing some idiotic NYT article that says they started dating in 1979, no, you're wrong.  At the end of 1979, Michael Caine introduced Mia to Woody when Mia arrived at Elaine's to lunch with Michael and Mick Jagger.)

Mia a star? 

We couldn't stop laughing.

Again, no one must ever challenge Mia on the veracity of her claims -- no matter how absurd they are.  

We're all just supposed to pretend and nod along while saying idiotic things like, "Yes, Mia was the first person on the cover of a PEOPLE magazine."  No, it was Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton (August 1973).  PEOPLE, in 1994, put Mia on the cover of their 20th anniversary issue (it wasn't) and only did so after Elizabeth Taylor turned them down (she noted that it was her and Richard on the cover and Richard had passed and she wasn't posing for them).  Since then, the lie has been perpetuated non-stop that Mia was on the cover of the first issue of PEOPLE -- even leading to a Taylor Swift spoof of the cover.  It was Elizabeth and Richard and it was covered by Nora Ephron in her "People Magazine" column for ESQUIRE in March of 1975 -- the column is collected in Nora's SCRIBBLE SCRIBBLE: NOTES ON THE MEDIA.

In 1979, the only term for Mia Farrow was "freak" -- although you could add the modifier "fading" in front of ''freak."  She'd appeared fully nude in THE WEDDING and disgusted many with that body.  The film had bombed.  So had her big 'action' film AVALANCHE -- forget the snow, Mia was the real disaster of that film.  She had a small role in DEATH ON THE NILE, the film that was supposed to turn Agatha Christie's Poirot into a film franchise.  Instead, DOTN killed it (it made half of what the previous Poirot film, MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS, did).  Then came HURRICANE, a bomb that, in ticket sales, barely made 1/4 of its shooting budget.

She was 34 and her film career, such as it was, as a leading lady was dead.  From 1964 through 1979, she'd starred in 14 films and only one, 1968's ROSEMARY'S BABY, had been an actual hit.  If Woody Allen hadn't put her in 13 films, she wouldn't have gotten three Golden Globe nominations, two BAFTA nominations, or a David di Donatello nomination  or, honestly, have anything to show for her 'career' after 1968.  

Is that why we're not supposed to be surprised that as late as the fall of 1992, Mia was planning to star in Woody Allen's MANHATTAN MURDER MYSTERY?  Mia had a fit, remember, when she found out Diane Keaton would be in the film instead.  Woody was shocked that she thought the two of them could be in court, that she could be accusing him of molesting Dylan and yet she thought he was going to direct her and co-star with her in a film.  As he told 60 MINUTES, he told her in August 1992, "You're accusing me of child molestation and you think we're just going to go on with the movie?"

It's not just that she thought she was going to make the movie, it's that she wanted to make the movie.  If you had just accused someone of molesting a child, would you be eager to work with them?  No, not if you really believed the accusation.

We're not supposed to remember that and both the documentary and the so-called timelines -- POP SUGAR and THE NEW YORK TIMES -- go out of their way to ignore that and so much more.

Dylan has never changed her story.  Not one bit.

That's the lie, right?  Another one we're never supposed to challenge.

Because as the NYC case made clear, Dylan was changing her story constantly.  Read the State Supreme Court Decision (June 7, 1993).  Read it and wonder what the hell was going on where Mia had Dr. Nancy Schultz coming out to Mia's Connecticut home from New York and Dylan and Satchel "put glue in Dr. Schultz's hair, cut her dress and told her to go away."  Why did they have a bad opinion of the doctor?  What was Mia telling the two children?  These are questions you should be asking because, no, this is not normal behavior for toddlers.

For Dylan, the therapy ceases that month, August 1992.

And why was Dylan denied therapy after that.  The judge writes, "Ms. Farrow did not immediately resume Dylan's therapy because the Connecticut State Police had requested that she not be in therapy during the investigation.  Also, it was not clear if the negotiated settlement that the parties were continuing to pursue would include Mr. Allen's participation in the selection of Dylan's new therapist."  Hmm.

Doesn't sound like Dylan's state of mind was a pressing need for Mia, does it?

And yet, if Dylan needed therapy, it was during this time.   It's during this non-therapy time that Dylan has all those breakthroughs, right?

Oh, wait, we're not allowed to talk about that.  The official lie has always been that Dylan told the same story from the start and it never changed.  But it was December 30, 1992 when Dylan suddenly retrieved a previously unknown memory.  As noted in the court verdict, "at a time Ms. Farrow calculates to be the fall of 1991 -- that while at Mr. Allen's apartment, she [Dylan] saw him and Soon-Yi having sex."

And here is how Mia writes about that new development in WHAT FALLS APART:

She also recounted a time, more than a year earlier, when the weather was warm, and she was at Woody's apartment with Satchel and Soon-Yi.  She said that she and her little brother were left in front of the television while Soon-Yi and Woody disappeared.  After a while Dylan went upstairs to look for them.  She saw them out on the terrace with their arms around each other.  She called to them and they told her to ''go away,'' they wanted ''a little private time.'' Dylan said she pretended to go away but she hid on the staircase next to the bedroom door facing the glass doors to the terrace.  She saw them walk into the bedroom, and the door was left partially open.  Dylan crept up and watched.  She saw Woody and Soon-Yi on the bed, on top of the covers, and "they were doing compliments and making snoring noises.'' That is what she said.  And that "he was putting his penis into Soon-Yi's vagina."

Wow.  Dylan would have been six-years-old.  Quite the detective.  Mia quotes Dylan stating that Woody "was putting his penis into Soon-Yi's vagina."  That's interesting.  She recalls that incident a year later in December 30, 1992.  And she's using the terms, per Mia, "penis" and "vagina."  

She's just a therapeutic breakthrough, that Dylan.  In August, she's unable to talk about that area -- which she refers to as "my private parts" -- with a doctor.  She can only say "my private parts" -- and that's to Mia.  And then, also in August, her therapy ends.  But there she is sailing along to awareness and self-actualization as she retrieves apparently repressed memories and is now using words like "penis" and "vagina."

If the story's true.  

If it is.  And if it is, it reveals a certain obsession on Dylan's part with Soon-Yi.  That matters because?  Mia introduces the term "child molester" into the family -- with a posting on a bathroom door.  And when was that?  July 11, 1992.  She explains to the children that she's referring to Soon-Yi.  And less than a month later, Dylan's claiming to be molested by Woody.

Obsessed with Soon-Yi?  Yes, you could postulate that.  There's plenty more evidence to support that claim.

The documentary avoids that.  And it also avoids the snapshots of Soon-Yi.  January 13, 1992, while in Woody's apartment (she let herself in), Mia discovers photos of Soon-Yi nude.  That's how she learns of the affair.

Now if Dylan's 'breakthrough' in December of that year is real, one wonders why she never mentioned to Mommy that Soon-Yi had a boyfriend who was putting a penis in Soon-Yi's vagina a year prior in 1991?  

We're bothered by what Mia did with the photos.  She took them.  She held onto them.  Even after the case, she did not return them to either Woody or Soon-Yi.  She made photo copies of them and kept the originals.  All this time later.  Exactly why?  And exactly what does that say about her state of mind?

That's a little perverse and obsessive, isn't it?

And a lot pathetic.

Because Mia Farrow is a pathetic person.

And that's why it's highly likely that Mia coached Dylan -- as many believed including the Yale - New Haven investigators -- because she's that pathetic.

Mia and her groupies love to attack actual investigations -- the same way Mia likes to attack therapy, she thinks psychology and psychiatry are pseudo sciences and loathes them even more than Tom Cruise does.  She and her groupies try to act as though Woody hired the people involved in the real investigation into these claims that took place back in the 90s.  It was the Connecticut State Police who referred the matter to the Child Sexual Abuse Clinic of Yale-New Haven Hospital.

The police.  The Judge.  Legalities.

The documentary has a lot of clips from Woody's films.  

That does make sense.  Mia has no career without Woody.  She's a one-time movie actor -- ROSEMARY'S BABY.  It's only under Woody's direction that Mia truly comes alive onscreen -- ZELIG, BROADWAY DANNY ROSE, THE PURPLE ROSE OF CAIRO, his segment in NEW YORK STORIES, RADIO DAYS, etc.  But while it makes sense to feature those films remember how Mia launched this wave of the ongoing vendetta?  Using the Golden Globe tribute and playing on Twitter like she was surprised and aghast.

And that played with a lot of people ignorant on the issue of usage.  They didn't realize that for Mia's clip to have appeared in that tribute, the Golden Globes had to get her permission.

Guess who didn't get permission?  The filmmakers behind ALLEN V. FARROW.  They're using those clips without permission which can result in a lawsuit.

Now that lawsuit wouldn't hurt Mia.

That one.

But another one?

From the state of Connecticut, Mia taped Woody Allen on the phone without his knowledge.  What's the law in Connecticut?  Glad you asked: "It is illegal for a person to record a telephone conversation without the knowledge of all parties to the conversation (CGS§ 52-570d)."  So Mia handing that over to the film makers, that audio?  She can be sued.  She broke the law.  Woody can sue her for that and, in our opinion, he should.  He should also sue the filmmakers who chose to amplify an illegal act.  HBO should be sued for airing the documentary -- they should have demanded, before airing, a look at all the permission forms required and they should have immediately asked, "When Mia taped Woody, she was in Connecticut, before we air this documentary, what was the law there at the time she taped him without his knowledge?"  Ignorance of the law is no excuse but, to be clear, Mia knew the law and knew what she was doing was illegal because her friend Chris Rush had told her that in 1992 as they were plotting to tape various people (Woody, his chauffer Don Harris and others).  

Maybe if she finally faced some legal challenges, Mia would give up her vendetta?  Maybe.  Maybe not.  

Mia does realize Ronan's in the midst of another identity crisis, right?  And that her IRS filings from 1987 to 1992 have really picked up as a topic among her friends and 'friends.'  We're not really sure Mia's strong enough of an actress to get through an IRS audit.

But maybe she can.  

We just know that if we were Mia and we'd written several judgmental letters about a friend and her abortion (Mia is anti-choice, strongly anti-choice) and this friend was one of the few friends left willing to go on camera for Mia (and appears in the documentary), we wouldn't be trying to stir up so much, we'd keep her head down and not try to garner attention.  And hope that someone in possession of such a letter from Mia (she sent that letter to one of us) didn't feel the need, all these years later, to forward it to ______.  


But that's Mia, she craves attention and has no censor.  She tried to make Frank Sinatra, during their marriage and immediately after, believe that one of his employees and friends had slept with her.  It was a lie.  It was a lie and it destroyed a friendship and it destroyed the man's life.  But that's Mia, she's always had a hostile relationship with the truth.

Dylan, as we've noted before, is beginning to question some of what she says publicly.  She's only questioning it privately.  So far.  But even Dylan realizes the story Mommy Mia tells the world does not add up.  Especially not August 4, 1992.  The story Mia tells is that everyone knew Woody was never to be alone with Dylan.  Dylan had her birthday in July and Woody visited Connecticut for that.  And the rules were followed.  But then he visits in August and instead of protecting her daughter, Mommy Mia decides to go shopping.  Even Dylan's questioning that.   Even Dylan.

Mia's created an argument against Woody Allen and the filmmakers are happy to run with it and offer a one-sided documentary short on truth and reality.  ALLEN V. FARROW really doesn't document so much as it proselytizes.  It's a weak documentary but that was always going to be the case for yet another look at what some White girl claims happened to her -- decades ago -- and what resulted in a police investigation and an investigation by the most august bodies in the US at that time on the topic of abuse.  Her story got a hearing.  And was found lacking.  

Now it gets another hearing and another and another and another . . . .

There's no justice for the non-White children.  None at all.  They don't get four-part documentaries on HBO.  Not even Soon-Yi.  She's just cast in a racist role ("the dragon lady").  Mia has told one lie about her after another.  Remember when Mia called her slow?  Publicly.  Mia wasn't even talking to her then, had kicked Soon-Yi out of her life.  And Mia told the world she was slow.  Another lie she told the public over and over in 1992 and 1993?  That Soon-Yi wasn't 18.  Soon-Yi was 20 in 1992 at the youngest, 22 was her legal age -- and Mia can thank herself for that because Mia's the one who filled out the legal forms when she adopted her.  Her legal age in 1991? 21.  Mia has taken to insisting that the affair may have started in 1990.  If so, Soon-Yi's legal age then was 20.  Never was Soon-Yi underage despite the lies Mia told.

Mia abused Soon-Yi throughout the child's life.  Mia is not the saint she pretends to be.  She has had many screaming fits at her children in front of outsiders.  If they do not do what she says, if they do not toe her line and repeat her lies (as her son Moses Farrow has noted), she freaks out and becomes this cruel and abusive person.  

The court talked about how she attacked and abused Soon-Yi in their 1993 custody verdict.   This is not speculation, it's in the official court record.  Equally true, college student Soon-Yi had no home in 1992.  Mia didn't want her around, told her she couldn't be around her.  That's public record as well -- Mia writes that in her book WHAT FALLS AWAY.  While everyone's enjoying a relaxing summer in 1992, Soon-Yi's shipped off to a summer camp.  Mia doesn't want her around and, get this, Andre Previn doesn't want her around.

Andre who cheated on Mia constantly (she cheated on him too) wants to get on a high horse about who his daughter slept with?  Mia and Andre were unfit parents, that's reality.  They demonstrated that by disowning Soon-Yi.   Before she disowned her, Mia put all the kids on the phone after telling Soon-Yi that she'd hurt them all.  Soon-Yi was supposed to go through each of the children (Mia would eventually mother 14 children) on the phone apologizing and blaming herself and seek absolution.


She was a college girl who fell in love.  And for that she was punished.  And because she's Asian, she doesn't get the sympathy for what was actually done to her -- the sympathy we're all supposed to give Dylan for what Dylan claims happened.  That last beating, the one Mia gave to her after Soon-Yi was in college, what did Mia beat her with again?  Oh, that's right a telephone receiver.

Mia is a cruel person and a vindictive person.  She and Woody were over for some time by 1991.  He'd slept with various actresses he worked with from 1985 to 1991 and Mia believed he'd slept with her sister Stephanie.  Mia and Woody were over as a couple before 1991.   By the end of 1988, Mia was telling friends (in person, over the phone and in letters) that she and Woody had stopped having sex.  This continued in 1989 and 1990.  And back in 1986, everyone was talking about Woody's affair with Dianne Wiest  -- this is the affair her son Fletcher tells Mia about on page 234 of her book WHAT FALLS AWAY -- though Mia doesn't name Dianne.  Later, in 1989, Woody had a particularly well known affair in NYC -- one Mia was fully aware of.  They were friends, that was really about it.  Friends and parents of Dylan, Moses and Satchel (Ronan).  When not filming one of Woody's films, Mia spent less and less time in NYC.  

By the way, that state of the relationship, just friends, was noted by Soon-Yi in 1992:

Please don't try and dramatize my relationship with Woody Allen. He was never any kind of father figure to me. I never had any dealings with him. He rarely came to our apartment before his own children were born. Even then, he never spoke and the truth is I never cared that much for him. He was always preoccupied with work and never talked to me. Not really to any of us. Only when Dylan was born did he start visiting regularly and then only to play with the baby. My own father is Andre Previn, who came to visit pretty often and took us all out frequently. When I first got friendly with Woody, he and Mia were finished with their romance and were just friends. I think Mia would have been just as angry if he had taken up with another actress or his secretary.

It was long over between Woody and Mia, but she was offended that she was replaced with a younger woman and her own daughter at that.  Her daughter.  Not Woody's daughter.  And an adult despite Mia tacking her "child molester" note on the bathroom door in July of 1992.  

Moses backs up Soon-Yi's accounts of abuse.  Ronan, who was too young to witness anything or know what was going on, only knows the story that Mia has drilled into him and into Dylan.   Moses wrote about the abuse he suffered from Mia.  That's two for Mia and two against.  Then there's Tam and Thaddeus who are both said to have taken their own lives.  There's Lark Song Previn who lamented how her own mother had kicked her out of the family before she died.  There are the twins -- her first children, the twin boys she gave birth to --  and Mia, an anti-vaccer, by the way, likes to claim that she cured one of them from autism via the use of red candy wrappers.  It's a ludicrous claim but it fits right in with Mia's ego and she didn't just repeat this story socially, she also wrote about her 'scientific' cure in WHAT FALLS AWAY.  How long are people going to continue to pretend that Mia's not a wack-job?

Mia got seven of the kids to talk about how they knew Dylan had been abused and molested by Woody Allen.  This included Quincy Farrow.  We got to say it.  Mia has made fun of Woody Allen repeatedly because his name -- birth name -- is not Woody.  We always found that strange because Mia's birth name is Maria and not Mia.  And strange because Satchel became Ronan and Dylan's been Malone and other names.  But we're talking about Quincy and we need to note her original name.  Kaeli-Shea.  That's the child's original name.  We put it in for those who want to fact check us when we tell you the child was adopted in March of 1994.

Do you see the problem with her signing off on the 'we know Dylan's telling the truth' article?  

Kaeli-Shea/Quincy Farrow wasn't even born, let alone part of the family, in 1992.  Seven of the 14 children Mia mothered signed the note for Dylan -- five of them weren't members of the family at the time of alleged incident.  And we're saying mothered and not adopted, by the way, because Mia adopted more than 14,  She returned a few that she adopted.  Kind of like you'd give a puppy back to the pound.  So we're just sticking with 14 that were mothered and part of her family for more than a few weeks or a month.  So five of the seven were adopted after the alleged incident.  That leaves two plus Dylan.  Three.  14 kids in the family but only 9 were around at the time of the alleged incident and, of that nine, counting Dylan, only three were speaking in defense of Dylan.  Lark and Tam couldn't speak, they had both passed away.  Fletcher, who had always hated Woody, was the one speaking besides Dylan and Ronan.  

That really doesn't speak well of Dylan's claim or Mia's mothering.  Nor does the fact that Lark has passed away and Mia has nothing to do with Sara and Christine McKenzie -- Lark's daughters.  Lark spoke, at the end, about how she was used as a maid growing up.  She wasn't a child, she was Mia's maid.  This was observed by many people over the years including actress, writer and producer Jane Read Martin who testified that Mia treated Lark like "a little scullery maid."  It's one reason Mia has such a difficult time wrapping Daisy around her finger today.  Daisy joined the family after Lark and was close to Lark -- both were close to Soon-Yi.  

There was a way Mia treated the White kids, Soon-Yi has publicly spoken about it, Moses has publicly spoken about it.  That's the documentary that needs to be made.  But Dylan's White so a police investigation, an abuse investigation, and Woody's life just don't matter.  Woody and Soon-Yi by all accounts have a very satisfying marriage and they have two daughters.  And in his long life, he's 85-years-old, Woody's only been accused by Dylan.  Pedophilia isn't a one-time thing.  If he was a pedophile, there should be others coming forward.  And if he was a pedophile, why did he, according to the memory Dylan 'retrieved' in December of 1992, send her away in the fall of 1991 so that he could have sex with the 21-year-old Soon-Yi?  By Dylan's account, Ronan was mesmerized by the TV so Woody could have sent Soon-Yi out for food or given her cash to go get some outfit to wear to the next Knicks game and had Dylan all to himself.  But that didn't happen, did it?

And, if you apply logic to ALLEN V. FARROW, none of the documentary makes sense either.  Mia's dragged us back into the cesspool and, honestly, hasn't that been The Mia Farrow Story since day one?  It's really sad that HBO elected to wallow through the sewer with this nonsense.


Previous pieces on this tawdry tale include:

"The award for best self-created drama goes to Mia Farrow (Ava and C.I.)"

"TV: Another idiot for the idiot box"

"Mia and the meanings for America"

"Mia and her brood drag whatever's left of the name through the mud"

"TV: The gifted?"

"Dylan whines to Maureen Orth who passes it on to Janet Maslin"

"Media: "It's very rude of him," she said, "To come and spoil the fun!""

"He's a criminal (Ava and C.I.)"

"Saint Maria de Lourdes"

"Natalie Wood: The lies that remain repeated (C.I.)"

"Deep Thoughts From Roh-Roh Farrow"

"MEDIA: Hannah Gadsby is the 21st century's Jimmy Swaggart"


Texans are suffering

And celebrities like Bette Midler aren't helping with their attempts at 'pith' and 'wisdom.'  Robert Reich (an American writing for the British GUARDIAN) isn't helping either, not with garbage like this, "Yet the white working class has been seduced by conservative Republicans and Trump cultists, of which Texas has an abundance, into believing that what’s good for Black and Latino people is bad for them, and that whites are, or should be, on the winning side of the social Darwinian contest."

Honestly, WTF?

Robert Reich wants to take the suffering of people and turn it into some sort of racism event.  Robert Reich is a dumb hick.

Per AP's exit polling of Texas' 2020 election turnout:

According to survey data, Trump was more popular amongst white voters, 65% of white voters supported Trump while 35% of white voters supported Biden.

Biden connected with Black and Latino voters, survey data indicates that 89% of Black voters and 67% of Latino voters supported the Democratic nominee.

However, other races of people surveyed supported Trump over Biden, according to survey data, 49% of survey results favor the sitting president to Biden’s 46%.

Starr and Zapata counties, where turnout increased about 15 and 6 percentage points, respectively, from 2016, were among a predominantly Hispanic swath along the U.S.-Mexico border that brought some of the worst returns of the night for Biden. In rural Starr, 51.3% of voters cast ballots — with 47% voting for Trump, compared with 19% in 2016. Biden lost Zapata, a county presidential contender Hillary Clinton won with a 33-point margin in 2016, and where former President Barack Obama garnered a 43-point margin in 2012.

How about we leave partisanship out of it?

The people in Texas are suffering.  A cold spell hit the hot state.  As Celeste in Houston told us, "We're just not used to cold like this.  A day or two is usually it."  Rodrigues in Denton remembers February 2014 being bad.  A cold snap came through and the roads froze.  "It was rough for two days," he remembers.  "But the third day the buses were running.  I remember because I had an interview for a county job and they didn't answer when I called so I assumed the interview was still on.  I took the bus there and walked around and around looking for someway in before I realized that the place was shut down.  It opened up the next day."  

Two Thursdays ago, the cold weather moved in for some.  For others, it was Sunday last week that the cold weather moved in.  It had been expected to hit earlier, two to three days earlier.  But it hit at the start of last week for many.  And it lingered and lingered.

During this time?  Many were without electricity, water and internet.  SUDDENLINK customers were especially blistering in their comments to us.  For Noah in Chandler, the internet went out that Sunday "around 4:00 pm.  I called and couldn't get a person.  Around 11 p.m. I called again and this time the automated system told me it would be up by 3:00 a.m.  So I got up at five and it was still down.  All day Monday, all day Tuesday, all day Wednesday, all day Thursday, all day Friday except for about 80s minutes, all day Saturday and then it came up at 4:00 pm today."  Noah expressed the same thought that many SUDDENLINK customers did: is the company going to prorate?  Susan in Lindale argues they should, "I pay about $125 a month just for my internet.  I was out for a week -- a full week.  Not only was I out but I also could not speak to anyone.  No matter how often I called, no atter what times I called, I never could get a person on the line.  This was lousy service.  I've got three kids under the age of 10 and we were trapped at home for a full week.  We lost electricity only one day, luckily.  But the kids had nothing to do.  It was too cold for them to play outside for very long.  With no internet, we had no films or games to distract with.  It did make me decide that I'd start buying books again.  I've been doing KINDLE and NOOK for years but if we ever have another storm like that, we need physical books."

A cold storm like that?

No one we spoke to could remember a storm like that hitting Texas before and we spoke with -- by text, by e-mail and by phone -- 172 COMMON ILLS community members in Texas.

Brenda in Fort Worth has lived in Texas her whole life and was born right after WWII.  She couldn't remember every experiencing a storm like this one.  "It iced," she said, "and then it just hung around and lingered.  I'm not used to that.  I can't remember that before, not like this.  There was a Christmas, in the last 20 years, where it snowed for maybe 20 minutes and then it all melted.  Usually, it lasts a little bit longer than that but nothing like this."

Most of the people we spoke with suffered a water outage during the time period.  Those who now had water back on noted that it was hard to figure out whether or not you were still supposed to be boiling water before drinking it.  Lily in Canton talked about the worst part for her, "I"ll say it, going to the bathroom.  Okay, I can -- and we did -- pee in a cup or bowl and then toss it down the bathroom sink.  But s**ting?  We had a big plastic bowl that we left in the bathroom.  If you needed to crap, you put that bowl on top of the toilet -- with the lid on the toilet down -- and you lined it with a plastic Walmart sack.  You then did your business, wiped, tossed the tissue in the Walmart sack and then tied up the sack, carried it to the backyard where we had a trash bag that we just dumped the dumps in.  It was gross and it was disgusting.  I'm not going to pretend that it wasn't and I'm not going to pretend like it didn't happen."

In Mesquite, Francisco felt truly trapped.  Not only was their ice on the ground but his apartment is on the second story and "there was no way to down those stairs.  For four days, the ice was so bad and the stairs are rickety anyway.  I was dumping all the salte I had in the house on them and that didn't do much to help.  On the fifth day, by about 11 in the morning, I could go down the stairs -- moving very slowly and very carefully."  

Getting out was a problem.  That made things arriving even harder.  That was food and other things -- books or whatever from AMAZON but, for Katie near Jacksonville, that was also her insulin.

She recalls, "We knew the freeze was moving in.  My insulin was supposed to arrive on Wednesday and I figured it would.  Sunday would be bad and, the way things go, by Tuesday, it would be clearing out.  Only that didn't happen this time.  And so I was really worried because I was almost out.  I had one Lancet pen left on Wednesday when the meds didn't arrive.  I'm hopeful that they shipment will be there tomorrow [Monday].  But I planned for two to three days.  I hadn't planned for my water to go out -- that's never happened to me before.  But it did go out.  And stressing over the insulin and having no water?  Because by Tuesday, I'd consumed -- drinking -- all the bottled water I had on hand.

In Dallas, Sabina reached out to friends and neighbors to see who was in need.  And?  "Pretty much everyone I called was.  My husband has four-wheel drive and we stock up like crazy -- with water and food we're practically hoarders.  So I'd sack up stuff and he'd go out and deliver it.  That was every day of the storm.  There were so many people in need and that's just among the people I know.  I can't imagine how bad it was in the rest of the city or throughout the state."

People are suffering.  Even now, they're suffering.

Eric Levenson (CNN) reports:

The water issues are part of the sprawling impacts of extensive blackouts: families forced to sleep in frigid homes and cars, scavenge for a hot meal, forgo medical treatment or use melted snow to flush the toilet.
At a news conference Sunday afternoon, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said around 30,000 people remained without power in his state.
"Based upon the speed that I've seen power get restored, I suspect that all power will be fully restored across the state of Texas to every house either later tonight or tomorrow," Abbott said.
The governor said water services were being restored throughout Texas and that more than 3 million bottles of water had been distributed in an effort by the Texas National Guard, US Department of Defense and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

In Tyler, J.I. revealed he was still without water.  And?  He texted off for Monday explaining he hasn't been able to take a shower since his water went out last Tuesday.  And?  His boss texted him back that she'd have bottled water at the office and really needed him there.  If you stink, you can't be around the public.  And if there's any fall out over his texting off, we've already told him we will embarrass his boss and we will embarrass the 'compassionate' corporation he works for.  But that's what's going on right now?  In the midst of all of this, workers -- for nationally ranked companies -- are being told they have to come in to work on Monday despite the fact that they stink, they can't shave, they have no water.

Texans are suffering.

These people did not need celebrities and pundits trashing them, attacking them, trying to shame them.

Who failed the test?  We're sure some politicians failed.  And we're all for accountability.  

But the biggest failure came from people outside the state who failed the compassion test.  They were more concerned with scoring partisan points than they were with feeling for those in need.


Jim: Roundtable time.  Remember our e-mail address is  Participating in our roundtable are  The Third Estate Sunday Review's Dona, Ty, Jess, Ava, and me, Jim; Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude; Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man; C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review; Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills); Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix; Mike of Mikey Likes It!; Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz); Ruth of Ruth's Report; Trina of Trina's Kitchen; Wally of The Daily Jot; Marcia of SICKOFITRDLZ; Stan of Oh Boy It Never Ends; Isaiah of The World Today Just Nuts and Ann of Ann's Mega Dub. Betty's kids did the illustration. You are reading a rush transcript.


Jim (Con't): This is an entertainment roundtable. Who wants to kick things off?

Stan: Let me. When do I get DEADLINE back? VARIETY and THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER have both ended their obsession with Donald Trump now that he's no longer president. Why can't DEADLINE?

Betty: I know just what you mean. I needed a place, in the last four years, that was Trump free. A place like an entertainment industry magazine should have been the place to go. But no. Over and over all three offered Donald coverage. I just wanted a break from it. And DEADLINE will not let it go.

Marcia: He was a reality TV star. That's what I told myself as their obsessive coverage continued for four years. But now that he's out of office? DEADLINE needs to give it a break. Glad to know VARIETY and THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER have. I will once again be able to read them. Like Betty, I stopped visiting those sites because of their never-ending Donald coverage. There should have been a safe harbor where we could go and focus on something other than Trump but apparently that was way too much to ask.

Jim: Do you think we'll get another reality performer as president in the next few decades?

Wally: Yes! Mr. Biggles!

Jim: Who? Cedric, why are you laughing?

Cedric: Mr. Biggles is Paris Hilton's dog on SOUTH PARK and then she wants Butters to be Mr. Biggles.

Wally: And she and Nicole Richie were the stars of the reality TV show THE SIMPLE LIFE.

Jim: Anybody think Kanye West?

Isaiah: I would not write off Kanye politically. He's an artist of tremendous talent and if he made a real run for the presidency, I would follow the run. I don't know that I'd vote for him, that would depend upon his platform, but I would follow his run and be thrilled that he was running. We need more candidates.

Ruth: This has nothing to do with entertainment but since we are talking about candidates, I just re-read Ava and C.I.'s "Here we go again (Ava and C.I.)" and I want to stress that they are correct that we were told throughout 2019 that there were too many women in the race for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination. There were six women. There were 23 men. Never did we get told there were too many men in the race. I think Ava and C.I. stood alone in catching that so I wanted to note it.

Jim: Good point. Back to entertainment. Marcia, you wrote "The CW" noting that if you were told you could only have one broadcast TV station, it would be THE CW because so many of the programs you love are on that. And that the ones that aren't your favorite, you could still watch.

Marcia: Right. I could get by on just that one broadcast network if I had to. Even with no streamer, I could survive.

Kat: That's bravery!

Jim: You, Kat?

Kat: Honestly, I stream music. I need YOUTUBE and I need AMAZON MUSIC. I could handle having only one TV station as long as I had YOUTUBE and AMAZON MUSIC. I don't watch a lot of TV and when I do watch I can watch new or old, it doesn't bother me.

Rebecca: What about you, Jim?

Jim: It would be CBS for me. I've got to have THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I also like BOB HEARTS ABISHOLA. And I could get by on CBS. I'd watch the David Boreanaz show --

Rebecca: SEAL TEAM.

Jim: Right. And I'd watch MAGNUM and MACGYVER.

Dona: You getting yet why Jim was no good at TV reviewing? I'm joking.

Jim: Ha ha. Anybody else?

Elaine: I'm with Kat. Give me my music and I'm fine.

Jim: You don't really watch TV.

Elaine: No but Rebecca and I went to college with C.I. and shared a place so we are used to having the TV on with the sound down while music plays.

Rebecca: Yep.

Jim: Rebecca?

Rebecca: Any other year it would be ABC. But they only have one comedy night this year and their Thursday night leaves me bored. ABC really sucks these days. I guess I'd say THE CW. CHARMED, DYNASTY, the new Lois and Superman show, FLASH, ROSWELL, etc.

Jim: Betty?

Betty: I'd get buy on freebies. I'd do PLUTO and CRACKLE and be just fine with it.

Jim: Let's flip it, which streamer could you not do without?

Cedric: This time last year, I would have said HULU. Longterm HULU user but dropped it when they were nonresponsive to us over the changes they made. I now use YOUTUBE TV. I guess I'd say that. I need that. Even without the add-ons.

Ann: We have HBO MAX and STARZ as add-ons.

Cedric: And HALLMARK.

Ann: We don't have HALLMARK.

Cedric: You're always watching GOLDEN GIRLS.

Ann: That's on TV LAND.

Cedric: Oh. Sorry.

Jim: For any who don't know, Ann and Cedric are a married couple. Do we know our packages? I'm not being sarcastic. I mean I don't even know what Dona and I pay because it's auto-pay.

Trina: I used to know. But then my husband added this and then that and now I honestly have no idea. I know we have more channels and streamers than I keep track of. But we do have several grandchildren living with us right now so, for instance, DISNEY+ is probably needed.

Ruth: If I had to live with just one, I would go with AMAZON PRIME. They have a lot of movies on there that I watch -- I am talking the free ones, not the ones you purchase -- and the same with TV shows. And I probably watch the IMDB channel on AMAZON at least once a week if not more.

Rebecca: And that's where Judge Judy's new show will be -- IMDB TV.

Mike: We have way too many but my daughter and I watch everything. We love to watch at least three hours of something on Saturdays.

Wally: I'll say NETFLIX. I still watch SENSE8 and some other things I've seen there. They've had some good programs in the last 12 months. LUPON.



Jim: Has AMAZON delivered anything strong recently?

Mike: Not since season two of THE BOYS. I wish they could do content like NETFLIX -- in terms of delivering new content and doing so regularly.

Ty: AMAZON's always had a problem delivering inclusive content. For yeas, they offered the worst shows in the world and they all revolved around middle aged White men -- as though John Goodman was the standard we all strove for.

Cedric: John Goodman looks like death warmed over. He either needs to put on some weight, he looks like he's ill.

Rebecca: Maybe stabbing Roseanne Barr in the back causes him sleepless nights?

Jim: The cancellation of ROSEANNE. Still a boneheaded move.

Stan: ABC's most popular series and they axe it. It will serve as a sign of just how much rage and hate took place over the last four years. And the 'resistance' tries to pretend it was all the right-wing but their attacks on Roseanne demonstrate that it was also the faux left and center.

Ruth: They stole her show and that is disgusting. Sara Gilbert is disgusting. I have no respect for her or for anyone who stayed with that show. They are backstabbers. To steal someone's work -- their life's work -- just disgusting.

Marcia: They had to steal. No one wanted to watch any of them. They were failures over and over in one sitcom after another -- that's Goodman, that's Gilbert, that Laurie Metcalf. A non-stop string of failures is what followed them after ROSEANNE went off the air in the 90s. They only found TV success again when Roseanne decided to return to TV. They're thieves and whores who lie and steal. They should be ashamed of themselves -- every last one.

Isaiah: And let's include Whitney Cummings on that.

Ann: Good, I'm glad you're bringing this up.

Isaiah: Body shaming is wrong. Whitney has taken it upon herself to weigh in on the odor of men's testicles -- not out of concern, mind you, but to make a buck. I know because my 11-year-old nephew had a freak out over it. Does he smell? He was freaking out and we were all like, "Where did you get this notion?"

Ann: And it was Whitney Cummings -- truly more trouble than she's worth. Could you imagine the outrage if a male comic was going on about how women stink down there and then pushing a spray for them to buy and telling them that they didn't know how bad they smelled because their noses didn't reach down there?

Trina: Okay, I'm offended. For a woman to do that who presents as pro-woman is appalling. We know how women were shamed by Big Business to sell products like sprays for 'down there.' Nora Ephron wrote a famous essay about that b.s. So for Whitney Cummings to be embracing that? I just don't get that. It actually angers me. And I'm not anti-Whitney Cummings. I know she made some awful remarks about Roseanne but I also know she's tried to enlarge her view and is also trying to reach out to everyone. So I appreciate that effort but this is just stupidity and we should all be rejecting it as consumers, as citizens, as spokespersons.

Elaine: I am appalled by how so many people will whore themselves out in the name of Big Business. I will always applaud Lily Tomlin for refusing big money if it would mean whoring her character Ernestine out. We need more Lilys.

Kat: The funniest whoring recently was Bruce Springsteen and Cedric and Wally noted that before the Superbowl commercial for Jeep aired ["Springsteen is just an embarrassment and a whore " and "THIS JUST IN! SOGGY BRUCE SELLS HIS ASS AGAIN!"]. But what makes it even funnier now? "Jeep, if you're going to drive drunk, do it in a jeep." I mean, how embarrassing. And you have to wonder if the news of the DUI arrest had come out before the Superbowl if Jeep would've still aired the commercial?

Jess: My guess is no.

Marcia: Agreed.  And how pathetic is he and his liars in the press who kept trying to spin his DWI for him?  Disgusting.

Ruth: On disgusting, I am really starting to get disgusted with AMAZON's KINDLE UNLIMITED.  I thought it was going to be so much better and it is pretty much useless in my opinion.  I feel like I have read everything they have to offer and that I read it all by six weeks into my paying for it.  Anyone feeling any different?

Isaiah: Nope.  I'm bored with it, honestly.  They need more books and they need real books.  Whomever called out the HOURLY HISTORY books was right to do so.  Those aren't books.  They're embarrassments and there are easily 100 of them that show up over and over every time you try to find a book.

Cedric: I'd say I'm beyond disappointed, honestly.

Rebecca: I wasn't needing masterpieces, just some good books, even good trash.  And I just didn't find it.  Do they update at all or is it the same pool of books?  Stan, what do you think?

Stan: Maybe I'm a mood but I'm just not happy with KINDLE with much entertainment.

Jim: A mood?

Stan: Except for CALL YOUR MOTHER and CALL ME KAT, I'm not really pleased with much on TV right now so maybe it's my mood.  I hate THE BLACKLIST right now, for example.  Every thing Ruth's written, I'm right on board with.

Jim: Ruth?

Ruth:  You cannot disappear Liz.  It just will not work.  It won't.  But they have done it again, like they did when the actress was pregnant.  And the cast is not strong enough to hold your interest.  Maybe if Samar was still on.  But with Mozhan Marno off the show, they really cannot afford Megan Boone being off as well.

Betty: I really miss Mozhan.  Since she left the show, it hasn't been the same.  They should have brought her back.  Have her get better or have her lose all of her memories.  She had to go into hiding, if you don't watch the show, because she was a former Mossad agent and the Israeli government saw her as a threat because she was having problems with memory and, as a result, might accidentally leak something that was classified.  Samar really needs to be back on the show.

Mike: And it's stupid.  You don't have Liz on right now, you killed off her mother, Raymond's big enemy.  So all we get is the timid new female character.  She can't stand up to anyone -- let alone all the men she works with -- and the actress is dull.  That might be because the character's written so timidly.  But it's also true that 2021 is not time to offer an hour long sausage fest.  This is ridiculous.  As the father of a young girl, I'm appalled by THE BLACKLIST's inability to offer a strong female and to feature a show with Raymond, Dembi, Harold, Donald and Aram every week and where are the women?  It's 2021.  Where are the female cast members?  This is ridiculous.  It would be bad even if Liz was on lately but it wouldn't be as bad.

Stan: I was happy when the show got renewed for another season.  But then came these episodes, one after another, with no Liz.  And now, I honestly don't give a damn about the show and I'm not watching another one of these bad episodes.  I'll wait until Liz comes back.  The show sucks.

Ruth: It really does.  And I loved that show.  I was upset when they killed off Tom, Liz's husband, but I kept watching.  The least three or four episodes have been unwatchable.

Isaiah: But, Stan, you still like PRODIGAL SON.

Stan: Yes, but that's about the only hour long show I can stand right now.  And I agree with Mike, by the way, WANDAVISION is the worst show of the year.  And how dare they, MARVEL, which has spent the last ten years doing movie after movie with male superhero leads and only one film with a female superhero, how dare they take Scarlet Witch and give her this cheesy ass 'sitcom' spoof instead of giving her real episodes where she can use her powers and fight.  This show is an embarrassment and honestly reminds me of the SNL parody a few years ago about how MARVEL's first female superhero movie would be a romcom where Black Widow falls in love.

Ann: WANDAVISION is that insulting.  I don't respect any critic that refuses to call out the sexism of the plot and of the execution of that show.  It's disgusting.

Elaine: I don't get how Wanda, in all the films, had that thick accent yet in WANDAVISION, the accent is just gone.

Stan: I've wanted to write about that but every time, I forget to make that point.

Jim: We need to wind down but what was TV's last good superhero show.

Mike: The MARVEL shows on NETFLIX!



Jim: Okay, we'll go ahead and end there.  This is a rush transcript.


 Note this roundtable was done the morning of 2/14/21 but we didn't have an edition that week.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.
Poll1 { display:none; }