Monday, July 25, 2022

TV: EPIX disappears one woman after another in WOMEN WHO ROCK

Documentaries?  Forget truthful, these days we'd settle on them being just fact-based since they apparently can no longer handle factual.  We realized how low the genre had sunk when EPIX began airing their four-part mini-series WOMEN WHO ROCK.


3 JESS

 

Alarms really start to go off about 16 minutes into the first hour as you see Wanda Jackson performing "Hard Headed Woman" and the screen tells you it's 1960 as critic and Janis Joplin biographer Holly George Warren states, "Back in the day, Doris Day was kind of the role model just to stand there and sweetly sing and Wanda puts all this raunch into it with that amazing voice and . . ." 


Oh, okay, we get it.  Facts don't matter at all in this garbage being foisted off as history.  


Doris Day was a big band singer.  She started in 1938 and lasted through WWII.  What does that have to do with 1960?  Before the 40s are over, Doris Day has become a movie star and is no longer touring.  She still has hit records but she doesn't tour.  Is Holly that stupid?  Is she confusing Doris performing "It's Magic" in 1949's ROMANCE ON THE HIGH SEAS with an actual concert?  


Maybe Holly should have noted that Wanda didn't write "Hard Headed Woman" and didn't have a hit with it.  She performed it.  After Elvis Presley took the song to number one.  Took it to number one in 1958, we should note.  So later, in a concert, she's covering Elvis' hit record and signing it like she's Elvis.  Oh, what a breakthrough for women! -- if you're a fool.


Should we point out that the footage that they're attributing to 1960 is actually Wanda performing on November 29, 1958.  You can find it all over YOUTUBE and people producing a so-called documentary should have found it and credited it correctly.


And, by the way, Doris Day was an excellent singer.  A real one.  And she didn't disown her heritage or 'find God' and rebuke her past hits -- something many others can't say.  Wanda Jackson had a brief career in rockabilly and then did ballads and then returned to country.  Is there a reason that Margo Price is in this special?  She makes country today but for some reason, women like Dolly Parton, Loretta Lynn and so many others aren't noted.  And where's Kitty Wells who, like Wanda, played the guitar and who crossed over from country to the pop charts years before Wanda in 1952 with "It Wasn't God Who Made Honky Tonk Angels."  Though they were eager to include blues and gospel in the birth of rock, somehow the makers of this 'documentary' didn't seem to grasp that both folk and country music also gave birth to rock.

  

Before we got to Wanda -- an artist whose hits were never played in the mini-series -- we were told that this or that woman was responsible for women in rock.  Some of that was questionable as well.  It was also questionable to start with Mavis Staples during this period because Mavis wasn't even born until 1939 and she notes she didn't begin performing with her family until 1949 (she may be referring to the early training her father gave her and her siblings since most histories of The Staple Sisters use 1950 as the start date).  And it was questionable to bring up Aretha Franklin's name before Wanda Jackson and discuss her in terms of the 1950s while including footage of Aretha performing her 1967 hit "Respect."


Odetta comes up in the sixties discussion despite Odetta beginning her solo career in the fifties and finding success in the fifties.  Nina Simone is also dropped into the sixties discussion.  Macy Gray wants you to know that various issues "made her life really difficult"one of them, we believe, would be the fact that she had her first hit in 1958 but she's being shoehorned into the 60s.


G*ddamn in a song ("Missippi G*ddam") is what stood out for the ridiculous Tori Amos.  (Nona Hendryx make some meaningful statements regarding Nina and she's the only one who does.)


The sixties period is appalling over and over.  This year, rock legend Ronnie Spector died.  She's not mentioned by name in the four hour mini-series.  She does pop up in a photo with other members of the Ronnettes (whose hits include "Be My Baby" and "Walking In The Rain") but she's not identified.  The only one of four people in the photo identified on camera in this supposed special honoring women?  Producer Phil Spector -- who abused Ronnie in their marriage and who died in prison after being convicted of killing Lana Clarkson.  


Let's hear it for . . . the boy?


The mini-series is a nightmare from start to finish.


Diana Ross would be completely ignored if not for a photo that pops up during the eighties (a seventies photos) without any caption or any mention of her and if not for Julianna Escobedo Shepherd and singer-songwriter Rickie Lee Jones who speak intelligently about her in the one minute and ten seconds devoted to Diana. 

One minute and ten seconds.


Diana Ross had her first number one hit in 1964.  She is one of the main artists who broke down the color barrier in the sixties -- that was on the radio, that was on TV, that was in teenage magazines, and that was in night clubs and in Las Vegas.  Diana and the Supremes were one of the few American groups who charted regularly during the British invasion -- in fact, they'd have 12 number one pop hits in the sixties. They were the first group of women to top BILLBOARD's top 200 album chart.  They remain the best selling vocal group of all time.  Diana Ross and the Supremes had 26 songs in the 1960s that were top forty pop hits.  In 1970, Diana went solo and not only was she a movie star in the 70s, she was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Actress. And she would have 26 top forty hits on the pop charts, 26 on the top forty dance charts, 39 on the top forty R&B charts, and 28 on the top forty AC charts (that includes this year's "Turn Up The Sunshine").  

 

 

 

And, actually, add one more to each of those tallies since she was a featured vocalist on "We Are The World" which did go to number one on the pop, dance, R&B and AC charts.


Diana gets one minute and ten seconds.  


Labelle gets over four minutes.  Now we're not talking the original group of the Bluebelles that started in the sixties.  They've already been covered in the mini-series before we get to the 70s.  Labelle is the group that begins in 1970 and lasts until 1976.  Six years.  In 1972, they have their first chart hit performing "It's Gonna Take A Miracle" with Laura Nyro.  They will have six more songs chart -- on pop, AC, Dance or R&B -- in the life of the group with only four of those songs ever going top forty on any chart and only two going top ten.


But they get four minutes. 


Again, not talking about the sixties girl group that Cindy Birdsong was part of until she left to join Diana Ross and the Supremes -- that group had hits.  We're talking about Labelle and they get four minutes.  


And, guess what, not one of those minutes notes Laura Nyro.  


In fact, Laura's never noted at all.  The woman who founded the female singer-songwriter genre is not noted.  There would be no Carole King without Laura Nyro.


'W-w-wait, Ava and C.I., Carole was writing music with lyricist Gerry Goffin in the 60s!! They had hits!!!'

 

Yes, the wrote hits for others.  Carole has talked at length of how they'd pretend to be Aretha or the Monkees or the Drifters and write a song for them.  Pretend to be.  Then Carole move to the west coast and tried to be part of a group (The City) and that would flop (even though they recorded her "You've Got A Friend").  And then in 1970, she recorded a solo album WRITER and it flopped and made no impression.  1971's TAPESTRY?  Lou Adler gave her Laura's albums -- MORE THAN A NEW DISCOVERY, ELI AND THE THIRTEENTH CONFESSION, NEW YORK TENDABERRY and CHRISTMAS AND THE BEADS OF SWEAT.  He told her that's the sound to go for.  And she went for it -- as those around her at the time can tell you.


She wasn't pretending to be a Drifter or Little Eva on TAPESTRY, she was pretending to be Laura Nyro.  And that's how she ended up with her only album that's a classic-- by trying to copy Laura.  If that's not a testament to Laura's power and place in history, we don't know what is.


But Laura gets overlooked -- even though she's the only female singer-songwriter Joni Mitchell's ever thought worthy of a comparison to herself.  


Carly's never mentioned.  Right, a special on women who rock without Carly Simon and "You're So Vain" being mentioned.  It would be like ignoring Alanis Morissette and "You Ought To Know." That's because we're stuck with the nonsense of Bonnie Raitt.  

 

Bonnie is wonderful . . . as an a.c. artist appealing to middle-aged people in the 90s.  She records and she tours and she's nothing special.  She's given chance after chance 1972 until 1982 when WARNERS dumps her.  She released 'albums.'  Song collections that were meaningless and not true albums.  They made no statements, there was no cohesion.  In the mid-80s, she's recording Bryan Adams' "No Way To Treat A Lady" and really begins to connect -- including a July 4, 1986 Farm Aid performance that was a true turnaround as Bonnie connected with a daytime audience -- a daytime one -- like she'd never done before with any audience.  Even "No Way To Treat A Lady" worked -- it placed Bonnie, as she performed it, into a new perspective and the crowd fell in love with her.  It was this new love that was mined on 1989's summer release NICK OF TIME which would go on to spawn three top forty adult contemporary hits in 1990 -- and not top forty pop hit.  

 

If that seems harsh to you, it's also factual.  And before the revisionary history of this century began, the truth could be told.  "Unpredictable and unpackagable" -- that's what Patricia Romanowski wrote in the chapter on Bonnie in 1997's THE ROLLING STONE BOOK OF WOMEN IN ROCK.  Romanowski notes, "From 1974's STREETLIGHTS to her last WARNER release over a decade later, Raitt gave over control to a series of big-name producers including Jerry Ragovoy (STREETLIGHTS), Paul Rothschild (HOME PLATE and SWEET FORGIVENESS) and Peter Asher (THE GLOW).  At least that's who critics blamed as they questioned why Raitt couldn't make an album as good as her music."

    

Bonnie has a tale to tell and she's a wonderful influence once she gets her act together but stop pretending that was true in the `1970s.  It wasn't.  It's not until 1986 that she's really starting to connect and it's not until 1987 when she gets clean that she's able to start really steering her career.  Beginning in 1990, she is a chart presence and clearly an influence but she doesn't belong in the 70s unless you're talking about how she misfired over and over and failed to connect or make a real impression. 


Also omitted from the 70s?  Too many to ever note.  We do think it's sad that Melanie Safka is ignored.  The mini-series is not about rock music despite the title (and the pretense).   But if you're going to call it rock and you're going to cover the 70s, you need to note Melanie because she's at all the rock festivals of the decade.  She is the festival queen.


However, when you can go through the sixties in a mini-series entitled WOMEN WHO ROCK and not note Michelle Phillips or the Mamas and the Papas (Cass Elliot is noted only for her reaction to Janis Joplin performing live -- not for anything she sang or did) or Grace Slick or Sandy Denny or Jackie DeShannon, or  . . . .

 

Nancy Wilson notes that her band Heart and Fleetwood Mac were two of the few groups that had women in them.  She means men and women.  She apparently hadn't heard of the Mamas and the Papas or Jefferson Airplane or Jefferson Starship or Sly and the Family Stone or The 5th Dimension or The Velvet Underground (with or without Nico) or Blondie or Fairport Convention or The Seekers or . . .


Sorry, Nancy, we love you and we know you were edited poorly -- as were all the subjects.


Let's talk about that.

 

Chaka Khan, Norah Jones, Shania Twain, Jody Watley, the awful Joan Jett, Nona Hendryx, Mavis Staple, Tori Amos, Sheryl Crow, Rickie Lee Jones, Aimee Mann, Susanna Hoffs, Tina Weymouth, Merry Clayton, Kate Pierson, Margo Price, Natalie Merchant, Sheila E and Pat Benatar are among the women artists featured.

 

We know a number of those women.  And we know who influenced them.  So we asked a few, "What the f**k?"

 

We were told they mentioned Carly, they mentioned Grace, they mentioned Tracy Chapman and Janet Jackson and Michelle and Cass and --

 

It was edited out.

 

The segments were pre-planned.  Noting how a woman reads the lyrics to a Sheryl Crow song (not really a Sheryl Crow song in terms of who actually wrote it) on camera, we were told the woman balked at it but went along.  That's why she stumbles on camera as she reads it.  They brought albums -- vinyl ones -- to all the tapings, the producers did.  Many of our friends refused to handle the vinyl and refused to read lyrics on camera.  The producers would play the vinyl and try to encourage the interview subjects to bop along to it.

 

They would, when asked about this or that artist, reply and those comments were included.

 

But when asked about their influences, they would cite their own, real influences.  And this would be scissored out of their interviews.  

 

The producers wanted certain artists pushed.  And that's the real lesson here, don't let a man 'famous' for men's underwear, another man who is responsible for HGTV programming and a woman whose big credit is a TV special about ONLYFANS sex performers make a documentary about women in music.

 

Sheryl Crow is a nothing.  Her first album that hit was TUESDAY NIGHT MUSIC CLUB.  She wasn't responsible for it.  A man killed himself because of that claim -- that falsehood.  Sheryl was failing and failing and failing.  She joined a group of men who had a workshop and, with them, she wrote some songs.  Now "All I Want To Do Is Have Some Fun" is not Sheryl's song.  She's never written imagery like that again because she didn't write it in the first place.  Or take "Leaving Las Vegas" which Sheryl lied to David Letterman on national television and claimed she wrote when, in fact, David Baerwald came up with the idea and wrote it with Kevin Gilbert, Brian MacLeod, Bill Bottrell, David Ricketts and Sheryl Crow.  But there she was lying to David that she had written an autobiographical song.  


On the mini-series, Sheryl wants you to know about the sexism involved in her career.  People didn't think she wrote her songs, she huffs.  Because she didn't.  She co-wrote.  And then she wants you to know that a man (Bill Bottrell) walked out on the recording of her follow up album.  She doesn't explain that he walked out because of the fact that she was lying about the songs in interviews, taking credit she didn't deserve.  She just has the man in a huff and wants you to know that, thank heavens, Trina Shoemaker was in the studio because Trina engineered the album and it was great to work with a woman.


Really?  Because she's the eighth listed engineer or assistant engineer listed on the album's credits  -- eighth listed and behind seven men.  In fact, she's the 26th listed name on the credits -- of 38 names.  If Trina's the sole engineer, she certainly didn't get credit for it.

 

As a follow up to the massive TUESDAY NIGHT MUSIC CLUB, the album sold.  But it sold less, far less, than TUESDAY NIGHT MUSIC CLUB and set the pattern for every Sheryl album which would sell less and less and less until she ends up selling 20,000 albums.  


Sheryl was a nothing and she is one of the reasons that Best Rock Female Vocal got dropped from the Grammys.  She wasn't that good but she kept getting nominated -- while actual women who could sing rock were ignored.  

 

Ignored?


That's what the program specializes in.  Over and over.  


Kathleen Hanna. She fronted grunge band Bikini Kill. The Deal sisters of The Breeders, Elastica, The Cranberries, Sleeper, the Cardigans are ignored in the mini-series.


We wish they'd ignored Kathleen.


No, we're not claiming that, like Sheryl Crow, Kathleen is undeserving of attention.  Kathleen deserves attention but the mini-series only pretends to to acknowledge her.  We hear people talk about her.  We see her onstage performing.  We even here from her.  She talks to the camera.


But, back up, we see her onstage performing.  


See.

 

We see her.


Was she the Charlie Chaplin of music?  That's what the mini-series makes her into.  Even when she's performing, we don't hear her singing.  Her lips are moving but there's no sound.


Apparently, Bikini Kill was too abrasive for the delicate ears of producers John Varvatos and Derik Murray and director Jessica Hooper.  We can see Kathleen and we can hear about her but we can't hear her perform.  It's disgusting.


And it's disgusting to put fake ass Joan Jett on this project.  She's 63 and it took her turning 60 to finally come out -- while pretending she was always out!  She spent the 80s playing a virgin who lived with her manager and his wife.  She spent the 90s and the 00s and the bulk of the 10s in denial. She's nothing but a product.  Suzi Quatro is big in England and stars playing Leather Tuscadero on HAPPY DAYS in 1977 and Joan crushes hard.  It helps take away the sting of playing guitar in Cherie Currie's band -- because that's what the Runaways were -- Cherie's band.  Excuse us, Cherie's back up band.  Now Joan was having sex with Cherie so maybe she was a little more "I'm With The Band" than other members but she was the back up.  Cherie cruised out of the band and it flailed around with Joan as the lead singer before collapsing.


Joan is a nothing.  Musically, she is Sha Na Na -- but with less talent and charisma.  Off stage, she will never live down watching 36-year-old Kim Fowley rape 16-year-old Jackie Fuchs and laugh.  She lies today and tries to pretend she didn't know about it until Jackie spoke publicly of it in 2015 but she knew, all the Runaways knew.  Cherie talked about it in a 2004 documentary. And Victory Tischler-Blue (who replaced Jackie Fuchs in the band) noted that everyone in the band knew about it.  But Joan, who Jackie saw watching as she tried to push the man off her, tries to play like she had no idea at all and, lies, that if she had known about it, she would have tried to stop it.


Joan is a fake and imposter.  She's about as real as The Monkees.  When we called out NPR for getting something wrong about her hit -- a major thing -- they reluctantly corrected it and told us that their source for that had been Joan herself.  That's not a surprise, Joan's a liar.


And maybe people need to take responsibility for the 'facts' that they amplify.  That's NPR, that's this piece of trash documentary.entitled WOMEN WHO ROCK.


Watching the hideous Ann Power reduce Tina Turner to a wig and what she wore -- not as a primal force in music, not as a one-of-a-kind singer, a woman who had one of the most successful tours of all time, you realize how sad and pathetic this mini-series is.  And when you grasp that nonsense is being celebrated from the 80s while Tracy Chapman -- an artist who played guitar, who wrote her own songs and whose voice is instantly identifiable -- isn't even mentioned?  While Madonna and Cyndi Lauper are celebrated but Janet Jackson is rendered invisible?  In the 1980s alone, Janet had ten top forty hits on the R&B charts (seven went number one) and eight top ten pop hits (two of which went number one).  Somehow she is disappeared.

 

Trouble as well is a WOMEN WHO ROCK mini-series that never names Cher in any decade but she is shown when Nancy Wilson is insulting women who "seemed ornamental to me [. . .] dolled up and [. . .] demure," you realize what garbage EPIX has decided to broadcast.  Nancy wasn't speaking of Cher.  Clearly, in the 60s, Cher was the essence of a hippie and she was never demure -- not in the 60s, not in the 70s, not in the 80s, not in the 90s, not in the 00s, not in the 10s and not today.  But it's telling how the producers and director used Nancy comments to slam Cher and how the slam was all they wanted to offer about Cher in a four-part mini-series entitled WOMEN WHO ROCK.  In fact, that probably says just about everything there is to say about how WOMEN WHO ROCK distorts women's history and their accomplishments.


 

Monday, July 18, 2022

Media: Double standards do not make for journalism

LIFESTYLES OF THE HUMDRUM AND PATHETIC.  That's what beggar media is.  They stick their hand in your pocket and make you pay for their musings and mental masturbation while pretending that they're imparting information and -- most laughably -- news.


3 JESS

It's probably always been that way.  Probably goes back to at least the pamphleteers of colonial America. Sure there was Thomas Paine -- always an exception to prove the rule.  But the rest were probably as useless as what we have today.


They were useless during Vietnam.  They begged for your money and they swore they were independent but they really weren't.  Back then they were largely magazines -- plus KPFA, WBAI, KPFK and KPFT.  And then, as time went on, cable access shows came along.  They got away with their con jobs because people paid attention locally and would just walk away when they caught on.  


Caught on?  It wasn't independent media and people would realize it as they noticed that every program had the same guests and the same topics.  Panhandle Media would insist that it was independent -- especially when begging you for your money -- but it wasn't.  By the time PACIFICA RADIO and Amy Goodman and others were stealing your money by pretending to care about getting US troops out of Iraq?  


It was a harder con job for them.  

 

The person in, for example, Houston who might turn off KPFT having realized that it wasn't serving any real purpose could now, thanks to the internet, check out KPFA or (worse) WBAI.  And then they'd quickly realize that the whole thing was a sham.


The grifters have now moved to YOUTUBE and ROKFIN and other video platforms.  And it's even harder for them to pretend that they're unique and special snowflakes working so hard just for you.


You can go program to program and you'll see that the 'big' story is there on THE HILL, on BREAKING POINTS, on Jimmy Dore's show, of course on Little Jackie's Hinkle, on CONVO COUCH, on . . .


It's the same damn thing.  


We got sick of it with KPFA.  It's even worse with this crowd.


They're loud and pushy and they promote each other in the same sort of circle jerk that created the blog boyz of the '00s.  What they don't promote are stories that actually matter because they can't do journalism.  That would require actual work and a modicum of ethical behavior.

 

They have none.

 

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the sewer that is 'public affairs' and welcome to the biggest toilet clog of them all Sabby Sabs.  Sabrina Salvati is physically based in Boston but her ethereal presence can always be found under any street lamp in the shady side of town.

 

She is not a journalist.  She is not a truthful person.  She uses her so-called public affairs show to mainly promote her friends -- and by 'friends' we mean people who can help her.  They're not interesting enough, these people, to be characters in a Jackie Collins novel but they could certainly populate Joyce Haber's THE USERS.  


Because we are not Sabby, we tried to give her the benefit of the doubt.  February 28, we noted (in "TV: Cringe-worthy TV") that her tactics while interviewing Nick Brana.  She came off like an ass.  Last week, she did part two by interviewing the so-called victim.  Did she badger her and make her cry the way she did Nick?


No, because she has no ethics.  As we noted of that February interview with Nick, maybe she was playing devil's advocate.  We allowed that this might be her style.


But she's a fake ass and she proved it last week.  


She brought on the woman and we didn't see tough questions.


We didn't see anything worth watching.


We're going to call the woman "X" throughout because she didn't want to be known.  She insisted.  She didn't want to be known.  She was ''outed.'' 


So we'll just call her X and we'll  also call her damn pathetic.


While X played pathetic, Sabby played corrupt.


Months ago, Sabby badgered Nick into crying.


Not so with X.  With X it was "we're not going to show his face" -- Nick's -- in clips from his interview with Sabby because it was 'triggering.'  Oh, poor baby, X can't handle even seeing his face.  Let's get the vapors out for her.


Yes, Sabby cry-baby-proofed every element to make sure that X was treated as a truth teller.  She even brought on Anthony Zenkus.  Because Zenkus was going to offer an independent analysis as a trauma expert?


No.


An independent analysis would require that Professor Zenkus was independent.  But he wasn't.  He was friends with X and had conversations with her for months.  That's right, boys an girls, he is not impartial.


So why was he on?  To further cry-baby-proof the interview for X.


Barbara Walter sucking up to Barbra Streisand for the 1976 prime time special (Barbara interviews Barbra Streisand and Jon Peters in one lengthy segment and then President-elect Jimmy Carter) didn't compromise herself as much as Sabby did -- and that's really saying something.  (Though Walters always lied that she didn't give Barbra editorial control, Barbra did in fact cut that interview the way she wanted it.  The film was turned over to her and she was over the editing of it.)  

Zenkus embarrassed himself.  He started off talking about what trauma was and wasn't -- and it wasn't money or fear of money or -- Huh?  Does he not know people in poverty?  Then he wandered back around and wanted to tell you that fear of losing her job caused trauma for X.  Oh, so it can be trauma?


He made no sense and we'll assume he was in difficult position -- maybe he realized ethics were being violated -- and was struggling on his own.


Sabby knew what she was doing.


She let X go on and on.  An hour in, we're still not hearing rape accusations.  


What did we hear?  She and Nick Brana began a friendship on the phone when she was offered a job with the People's Party -- that's the organization that states they want to be a third party and currently has some effort to draft Jimmy Dore into being their presidential candidate.  


She was hired.  She and Nick continued to talk on the phone.  They may have been masturbating at this point, she wasn't clear on that.  But at some point she went to his city and attended his birthday party which was just her and him.  And a physical relationship began.  And then, over time, he would want to talk to her on the phone for long hours. 


This is the assault, please note, he would call her and she'd be on the phone for hours when she just wanted to go to sleep.


Poor X.  If only Alexander Graham Bell, when he'd invented the phone, had invented a way to end calls when you were ready to go.  What's that?  He did invent that?  Well tell X, please.


Sabby certainly didn't tell her.


Sabby promoted this idiot airhead as a reliable victim who was wronged, so wronged.


No, she wasn't.


If anyone was wronged, it was her 12-year-old daughter who really shouldn't have to be telling Mommy to break up with Nick.


X is the most pathetic piece of trash in the world.  You don't pull your child into your relationships.  


You're the adult, grow the hell up.


After X went on and on, that's all she had.  She finally -- thanks to a 12-year-old -- has the will to tell Nick that it's over and she just wants to be friends.  But he still calls her.


Did he?


It's hard to believe anyone could be as pathetic as X is.


Let's say he did?  Maybe next time learn that no is no.  


We're not talking to Nick right now, we're talking to X.


If you say "no" over and over to someone who's pursuing you and, every time you say "no," you eventually say "yes," you are sending mixed signals.


If you want to just be friends, you don't move beyond that.  If you do, that's on you.


After they broke up, he would call her sometimes and ask her if she'd get on camera and finger herself again like she used to for him. 


X, we never need to know that or about the phone sex you would have. 


We didn't need to know.


But you did put it out there.  


So here's reality, you had a consensual relationship with Nick.  


That's all you had.


X wants you to know she was sexually harassed.  We don't think a court would see it that way.


In her job, she reported to the board.  Nick sits on the board.  He is not the entire board.


She chose to enter into a relationship with him that included physical sex and included phone sex and digital sex and sex, sex, sex.


Then she decided she wanted out of it.  


That's where it was.  Quit pretending you were raped -- as some of your 'helpers' have spread around -- and quit pretending you were used.


You look like a whore, X, you look like a whore.


You look like someone who didn't think you could get the job without sleeping with someone at the organization.


More to the point, you kept the affair secret.


At one point, X is whining to Sabby about how mean old Nick told her she let him down by not Tweeting more about his winning a certain post in the organization.  

Simpering as usual, X says that she explained it wouldn't look right if she did more than one Tweet and Nick didn't understand this!!! It wouldn't look right because she was over -- cry, cry, sob -- election integrity!!!!


FRAUD.


That's all X is.  No, it wouldn't have looked right.  And, no, it was not right for her to be over election integrity and sleeping with one of the candidates.  She owed it the People's Party and to every candidate in that election and everyone voting to have been honest about what was going on.


She didn't.


Fraud.  That's what she is.  She betrayed the trust put in her.


None of this makes Nick a saint.  Nick also should have owned up to the relationship.  The organization should have had workplace guidelines in place that insisted people come forward when they entered into sexual relationships with co-workers.


X never did that.  


She's a pathetic cry baby.  Is she telling the truth?  She probably is.  She probably is that pathetic. But she's not facing the truth.


Facing the truth requires her realizing she's as responsible as Nick.  They both deceived the organization about their relationship.  They both lied and hid it.  And then when it fell apart -- as so many relationships do -- hurt feelings got amplified and nonsense like whispers of rape entered into the discussion.


You have to take responsibility for your own life -- you can't farm your own responsibility off to your 12-year-old child.


In the lead up to this interview and in the immediate time after some were screaming that the People's Party is defending Nick!!!!!


Yes, they are.  This is an attack on the People's Party.  She's not just attacking Nick, she's attacking the organization itself.  So if the People's Party defends Nick, it's defending itself.


It would be better for both the organization and Nick to acknowledge that mistakes were made and announce a new policy was in place.  


Sabby and Anthony both pimped the lie that X was outed and this was wrong and blah blah blah.  She wasn't raped.  And it was X talking to others that brought the issue up back in February in the first place.  She wasn't silent.  She was attacking Nick.  Nick has the right to defend himself from attacks.  He did not expose her.  


This is nonsense -- the accuser gets to hide but lets throw the accused in front of everyone?


And Sabby Sabs is nonsense.  She attacks Nick when interviewing him but she doesn't even question X.  Not only that but she cry-baby-proofs the interview for X.  That's not fair, that's not ethical.  That's one-sided and outrageous and goes to the lack of any standard at all in the beggar media.

 

 


Monday, July 11, 2022

Truest statement of the week

In May 2022, a memo was leaked to the media which indicated that the Supreme Court would overturn the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision which legalized abortion. Despite the warning, the announcement of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision sent shockwaves across the country. The 6 to 3 conservative majority is doing just what republicans promised they would do if they were given electoral control of the presidency, Senate, and state legislatures.

The shock that a 50-year old right has been eliminated produced the expected reactions. There were protests at the homes of justices, at federal courthouses, and at the Supreme Court itself. Curiously, there were no protests planned at the home of Barack Obama, the person who could have acted to protect the Roe decision.

During his 2008 presidential campaign Obama promised to pass and sign the Freedom of Choice Act, which would have enshrined abortion rights into law, and remove it from the purview of the courts. But he did no such thing. On April 29, 2009 he gave a press conference on his 100th day in office and said, “The Freedom of Choice Act is not my highest legislative priority.” Obama had majorities in both houses of Congress and a veto-proof majority in the Senate. Not only was this legislation not his highest priority, it wasn’t a priority at all. He never attempted to get it passed.

However Obama is not the only villain in this story. In all likelihood he didn’t act because he knew that most democratic members of the House and Senate didn’t care that much about abortion either. It would have been a significant political lift but very few democrats cared enough to do any lifting.

Of course, Obama and most democrats didn’t care about anything other than doing the business of the ruling classes, that is to say neoliberal austerity and imperialism. That lack of concern for anything they claimed to care about resulted in the loss of 1,000 seats in state houses and congress during the Obama presidency. Any concerns expressed for the so-called down ballot races were like abortion, meant to keep the rubes in line and pulling the lever for democrats. Obama was a fundraising juggernaut, but for himself only. All the money raised was used to keep him in Washington where he could cut deals like his “grand bargain” with republicans. As democrats lost seats abortion rights were restricted across the country. Now only 16 states guarantee abortion access and democrats are complicit in bringing about this disaster.

 

-- Margaret Kimberley, "Democrats Exposed By the End of Roe v. Wade" (BLACK AGENDA REPORT).

 

 

 

Truest statement of the week II

So when Georgia's “progressive” democratic gubernatorial candidate, Stacey Abrams, tweeted on June 23rd, “Law enforcement are often paid less than a living wage, and that is wrong,” it should come as no surprise. The absurd claims of underpayment in a sad attempt to align cops with workers serves as another example of the typical campaign strategy of the Democratic Party —  punch left and move right. Abrams’ tweets comes after her opponent, incumbent Republican Governor Brian Kemp, released a targeted ad accusing her of supporting grassroots “defunding the police” campaigns. Abrams, of course, doubled down on her centrist-right politics insisting she has never advocated for defunding law enforcement. 

There’s a lot of confusion around Abrams because of her impressive ability to wield progressive messaging in order to move up the political ladder in furtherance of her career goals. Yet the actual political moves Abrams has made are a clear reminder that being Black does not make one inherently progressive. One does not move from tax lawyer to Democratic leader in the Georgia House to two gubernatorial races without making concessions. For instance, although grassroots Black- led organizations did the heavy lifting on changing the voting demographics in Georgia, Michael Bloomberg’s $5 million donation to the Fair Fight Political Action Committee platformed her as the woman who turned Georgia ‘purple.’ The misdirected investment in securing democratic wins in the state made it easy to dismiss the criticisms of what it meant for Abrams to cut deals with the man that criminalized Black communities through “Stop and Frisk” and other mechanisms. Just as the criticisms of her recent tweets advocating for the basic welfare of police officers will be dismissed because we have once again arrived at, “the most important elections of our lives.” 

Abrams lied. Police officers, on average, are not underpaid. The national median annual wage for police and detectives was $66,020 in May 2021. Furthermore, in her very own state, there are efforts to build Cop City , a $90 million police-training facility south of Atlanta. Abrams has yet to speak on this deforestation effort being pushed through with a completely undemocratic process. While expressing empathy for cops in a state where Black people are under tremendous economic pressure, with the the second highest inflation rate in 2022,  suffering from brutal police abuse, not much has been said by Abrams about The Atlanta Police Foundation, the main force behind cop city, providing free housing for cops throughout Atlanta while workers maneuver through surviving gentrification. When she insists that alongside increased wages, she will “develop guidelines for police department policies that govern community relations and transparency,” she is merely repeating a proven fallacy that increasing funding for police will transform into reforming the institution of policing.

 

 -- Erica Caines, "Punch Left Move Right: Stacey Abrams and the Democratic Party Shuffle" (BLACK AGENDA REPORT).

 

 

 

A note to our readers

 Hey -- 

Monday night.


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, 
Marcia of SICKOFITRDLZ,
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?

 

 

 

Peace,


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

 

 

 

Editorial: Ukraine and the embarrasing Americans in bed with that regime

As we watch people like Jane Fonda embarrass themselves rooting on war on Russia and eager to hop into bed with Ukraine, we really don't feel sympathy.


Yes, she's an elderly fool.  The woman turns 85 this year.  She has aged and it does show.  


But that's no excuse for her stupidity.  At least someone like Cher has an excuse.  Cher has no education.  


Jane did though.  And she had Tom Hayden to guide her and Fred Gardner and many, many more men.  It would have been nice if she could have self-actualized but that never happened, did it?  


Regardless, she got into the movement enough to grasp the reality of empire and how the CIA and the media work together to sell wars and to warp reality.


The world doesn't need more wars.


It does need more truth.


How sad -- and pathetic -- that at her age, she has no bravery and nothing to offer.


Those Fire Drill Fridays are a joke -- even she admitted there was nothing going on there (see Ava and C.I.'s "Media: The Jane Fonda Horror Show").  She does useless actions around climate that accomplish nothing and aren't supposed to accomplish anything.


Again, Cher has no education.  She's never though about war in any form or shape.  She has no political framework to speak of.  But Jane did.  Jane was movement.  Jane was self-proclaimed radical.  She damn well knows today how empire destroys and damages.  Had she elected to stay silent (like she did on the Iraq War after January 2007), we'd be rolling our eyes.  But she did worse, she's providing cover for it.


We don't know how many more years she thinks she has left but she's going out a disgrace.




TV: On wrap ups and streamers

ANIMAL KINGDOM, the TNT series, is wrapping up with season six and it's been a ride and then some.


Last night, failed father Craig (Ben Robson), now back on the drugs and feeling smaller than ever, got greedy regarding a heist the brothers and their nephew J pulled off.  Craig wanted to whine like he always does and brothers Deran (Jake Weary) and Pope (Shawn Hatosy) weren't having it nor was nephew J (Finn Cole).  It all came to a head with Deran and Craig coming to blows repeatedly.  


As they did so, it was hard not to think of the scene between Deran and J earlier this season, when they were talking about the heist (the one they pulled off tonight) and Deran wasn't sure they could count on an inside guy, would someone really turn on their own brother?  Yeah, J replied without giving it a second thought.


A lot's happened over six seasons, including losing a number of major characters.  Scott Speedman's Baz was the first to go.  He challenged Smurf (Ellen Barkin) and she put him down. Smurf herself died near the end of season four.  Leila George was already playing Smurf in flashbacks -- and has continued to do so.  This season, it's hard to imagine anyone other than George as Smurf which is really saying something because it's a complex role.



3 JESS



ANIMAL KINGDOM truly believes it is a dog-eat-dog world and that power is a zero-sum game; in fact, that happiness is a zero-sum game.

The family works together on heists and robberies but they don't really work together. You saw more teamwork and love with the crew in BONNIE & CLYDE than you do in the family of the Codys. And maybe that's a reflection of the time period the show was created in. Democrats in Congress couldn't get it together to save ROE V WADE. Barack Obama ran for president on many broken promises including that codifying ROE into law was the first thing he'd do as president (he told Planned Parenthood that in 2007). Once elected, he stated it was no longer high on his priorities. If he'd done what he said he'd do, the Supreme Court would not have been able to overturn ROE. If the Democratically controlled House and Senate had swung into action in May and June of this year, ROE still could have been turned into law. Instead, they did nothing and pretended that they had no choice.

They had choices. They could have pushed the vote through the Senate. Joe Biden could have had a come-to-Jesus talk with Joe Manchin the way Barack had one with Dennis Kucinich when Dennis said he wasn't voting for ObamaCare and Barack knew that they had to have Dennis' vote so Barack got on the plane with Dennis and, when the plane landed, Dennis was voting for ObamaCare. They offer the pretense of being powerless but it's just another con game.

In this environment, where we're lied to and disrespected, rooting for the Codys to rip off the Coast Guard or a bank or some wealthy entertainer Some gangster double crosses J and we're really not all that bothered when the gangster is dead.

When a society is rendered invisible and powerless, it's easy to get them to root for violence and vigilantism.

The show's always been well acted and well written. Along with the regular cast, JD Walsh, Laura San Giacomo, Denis Leary, Emily Deschanel, C Thomas Howell, Dichen Lachman and Daniella Alonso have also delivered strong performances over six seasons.

As the series barrels to a conclusion, it will be interesting to see whether upstart J really did know better than Smurf. That's been the dynamic since the show started. His mother Julia (Pope's twin) died before the series began and he's been determined to extract something from the survivors -- most of all Smurf. He's now pretty much dismantled everything she created and replaced it with a new system he controls -- the fence, the attorneys, the properties. Can he do better?

And will better be better for all or just for J?

That scene with Daren had real implications. As written, J has always been in it for himself. Finn has watered down the performance (or, more likely, isn't up to the acting demands) but J has always been the one who destroyed from within.

How does that play out with the others?

Pope is the most conditioned to loyalty. When Smurf (Barkin) pointed the gun at him in season four to get him to shoot her and kill her (she was dying from cancer), he wouldn't. J jumped in without hesitation and did the deed -- he's long been gunning for Smurf. Craig? He's really only loyal to himself. He's already written off his infant son now that the mother refuses to give in to his demands. That's the son, please remember, that Craig used to trap his brother Deran into not leaving the country.

As season four wound down, Smurf went gunning for Deran's boyfriend Adrian. Deran protected him and the two were going to leave the country to escape the feds and move to Australia where they could surf. But then Craig played the I'm-a-daddy-and-you-have-to-be-here-for-your-nephew card. Deran's loyalties were played on and he stayed. That was the worst decision of his life. He's found no personal happiness since Adrian left and now Craig, his older brother, is beating him?

In the animal kingdom, survival is the only rule and that's been the way J has played it. Unlike Craig, he hasn't kidded himself about it. But things can change and the one at the top of the chain can be toppled. It could be Pope in a rage realizing he's gone to prison for his family and done anything for them and everything but no one appreciates it. It could be Deran realizing that he sacrificed in vain. It could even be Craig in a rare sober moment. But, from the start, this has been leading up to J seeking revenge and bent on destruction.

Like Rebecca, we'd love to see Deran and Adrian reunited at the close of the show but the reality is that the road the Codys choose really doesn't have an off ramp to happiness -- just like the road Congressional Democrats have selected doesn't end with good mid-term results.

Results might be better if people could be honest. With that in mind, HULU and NETFLIX. HULU's problem is that it has no new content to offer.

Last month, Ty counted 12,457 e-mails complaining about HULU's layout and how they don't offer a page with what's new.

That's because very little actually is.

This is not a new development. Over ten years ago, we were addressing that reality. We were noting that HULU produced very little content itself so, in the summers, it was dependent upon USA's IN PLAIN SIGHT. (We noted that many times, here for the first summer they had to do without even IN PLAIN SIGHT.)  You do grasp that the program has now been off for ten years, right?

We warned that they were going to need to step up the program. It appears they tried briefly and then gave up.

It's nothing these days and it will get worse over the next few years as NBC and others pull their programs from the streamer. They had years and years to plan and they did nothing. When they had a program worth watching (DIFFICULT PEOPLE), they didn't try to grow it, they just let it run for three seasons. They have nothing to offer. And now that shows they did have streaming rights to (but that aired on television) -- LOVE, VICTOR -- are going over to DISNEY+ there is less and less of need for HULU. Some might argue that it's good for live TV. Do those people hate PBS? You get PBS with YOUTUBE TV, you don't with HULU.

HULU is most likely going to be phased out and shut down by the end of the decade. And why not? It's got nothing to offer.

Which brings us to NETFLIX. We'll note this report:

Jane Campion fears that Netflix’s new strategy after facing a loss in subscribers will result in the streaming giant being “more picky” about the projects it decides to fund.
“I do think they’re going to be more picky about other projects or, maybe, what’s sad is not taking risks on people without names,” Campion told the BBC in a recent interview.
Campion, whose 2021 Western “The Power of the Dog” garnered 12 nominations at the Academy Awards, believes that established filmmakers such as herself will likely be fine. However, she thinks the new strategy may hurt the prospects of up-and-coming filmmakers.
“I don’t think it would be hard for me if I wanted to do something because I’ve established a relationship and they’re incredibly loyal,” she said.

NETFLIX does not have one problem, it has multiple problems. Such as?

Subscribers have decreased. They've been decreasing all along but that used to be offset by the number of new subscribers they had.

New subscribers plateaued some time ago.

What's NETFLIX to do?

For starters, stop acting like members of Congress with their heads up their butts.

There are certain things they are doing that are driving lots of people away.

For example? One group is leaving because they don't feel the family is acknowledged or honored. If NETFLIX wants to keep those subscribers, it needs to program for them and to satisfy them. Most are not going to be bothered that all NETFLIX programming doesn't fit their own needs as long as some does. That means standing by family shows. That means finding their own YELLOWSTONE. It probably means less heavy promotion of shows about bondage, for example. There are times when NETFLiX seems to feature nothing but fetish shows. Why is that? Because that's what they're promoting on their home page.

We would argue that Melissa McCarthy's new show (GOD'S FAVORITE IDIOT) and Mike Meyers' new show (THE PENTAVERATE) both have wide appeal. But they're not promoted on the main page. They're treated as after thoughts. And NETFLIX needs to rethink promotion. The same trailer every time we hit the home page is not cutting it. You should have three trailers for every project and you should alternate them. The trailer for Mike Meyer's program sucked. We almost didn't watch it as a result. Now some might have liked it but there's a reason film studios have multiple trailers ready to promote their films.

If the offerings with wide appeal got a little more promotion, than some of the ill will from those who don't feel NETFLIX is programming for their families would go away.

The second big group is the group NETFLIX knows exists but now chooses to ignore.

SENS8 was a fan favorite. NETFLIX ignored that and axed the show. The outcry was so great, NETFLIX commissioned a film to wrap things up.

NETFLIX likes shows that last three seasons. Their subscribers do not. They want shows that last longer. And the big shows on NETFLIX have tended to be GREY'S ANATOMY, NIKITA, CHARMED and others with many seasons of episodes. Binge watching is a NETFLIX trend and, no, a three season show (with ten episodes a season) isn't really something you're going to binge.

NETFLIX's decision to axe shows is not sitting well with the people paying for the service. We heard non-stop complaints on Friday when we were speaking to a group of people (about the wars) and NETFLIX popped up. It was the one thing that united the crowd. Why is GRACE AND FRANKIE ending? Why did NETFLIX axe this or that? People aren't happy.

In the past, NETFLIX was aware of this group of people. These days, it just ignores them. Do they want them to go away because we heard from a lot of people that they were going to stop subscribing.

If you want subscribers, you have to give them product to watch. HULU can't. All this time later, HULU can't. It really only carries the programming of others plus the tiny handful of shows (like A HANDMAID'S TALE) that they make themselves.

NETFLIX has a ton of product. It's problem is that most NETFLIX subscribers don't know about it, that when it is promoted, it's promoted poorly and that the programs subscribers love keep getting cancelled.




Will Lehman's voice is the voice of many

 

That's Will Lehman.  He's running to be the next president of United Auto WorkersTrina's been noting him at her site and suggested we note him here.  

 

We agree too much time is spent by supposed left sites glorifying the likes of AOC.   


Unlike AOC and her social media presence, Will, if elected, could make a real difference.  


Equally true, the left media made a star out of AOC (and is now trying to make one out of Congressional candidate Gary Chambers).  We're not suggesting Will should be a star -- we are stating that if he got a little attention from our supposed left media outlets, it could be workers front and center where they belong in any discussion.


DARIK NEWS reports:


Last week, workers at the Ventra plant in Evert, Michigan, voted 94.5 percent to defeat the UAW-supported contract that kept poverty-level wages, imposed higher health care costs on workers and called for an end to sweatshops. Have done nothing. conditions in the plant.

On Thursday, the UAW bureaucracy announced a last-minute deal covering 700 employees at GM Subsystems, a low-paying subsidiary of General Motors. The material handling and warehouse workers’ strike could have quickly closed GM’s major assembly plants in Detroit, Lansing, Lake Orion and Flint, Michigan.

Lehman, a 34-year-old construction worker at the Mack Trucks plant in Macungee, Pennsylvania, announced its campaign Last week for the UAW Presidency.

In his latest statement, he declared his solidarity with Ventra and GM subsystem workers, saying they were in a crucial battle worthy of the support of all rank-and-file workers against both corporations and the UAW bureaucracy. “The ruling class of corporate owners is not going to give concessions anywhere unless forced by the workers. But workers everywhere are barred from using our power, corrupt union officials who protect profits and not the needs of their members,” he said.

 

 Isn't that a lot more important than whatever The Fraud Squad is spewing this week?


WSWS has been covering Will's campaign.  It's a shame others haven't.  WSWS notes:


Workers at Ventra Evart are already fighting back, Lehman said, noting how workers in the recently formed Ventra Evart Workers Rank-and-File Committee issued a statement on Friday calling for a strike authorization and demanding a strike deadline be set.

“I stand in complete solidarity with the Ventra Evart workers,” he continued. “These workers are taking an important stand for autoworkers and workers everywhere. Their problems are our problems—falling wages, rising health care costs, dangerous plants and no time for their families. A major victory by these workers would be a major victory for workers everywhere and would strengthen all our positions.

“My campaign calls for the widest possible mobilization of workers behind the Ventra Evart workers. Workers at Flex-N-Gate, Ford, GM, Stellantis—the Ventra Evart workers need your support. Share the latest statement of the Ventra Workers Rank-and-File Committee with workers in your plant.”

Saying that Ventra workers, in organizing independently to fight concessions, are showing workers the way forward, Lehman concluded, “Organize your own rank-and-file committees to connect with these workers, and build up a network of workers’ power in the plants. We can’t let them fight alone.”

 

Unlike AOC, Will is neither a spoiled, well off brat (the poor don't intern for Ted Kennedy) nor a media creation.  His concerns are the concerns of many -- especially those who have to work to put food on the table.  


Left media could do a lot worse than highlighting an actual candidate with actual issues and actual plans.

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