Matteo Lane does Liza; Brooke Shields does Rosie O'Donnell
I love it when Matteo Lane does Liza Minnelli. That when up today. I think my favorite is when 'Liza' answers a question with, "Probably when I was a wet nurse at Studio 54."
And let's pair that video with Rosie O'Donnell's interview of Brooke Shields from earlier this week.
On Tuesday's episode of "Now What With Brooke Shields," Rosie O'Donnell opened up about her rocky experience hosting "The View," and the surprise she felt when her relationship with former cohost and fellow comedian Whoopi Goldberg wasn't as smooth as she expected it to be.
O'Donnell
did two brief stints on the long-running talk show. She first began
hosting in 2006 and left in 2007, before returning in 2014, when
Goldberg was also a cohost.
"We clashed in ways that I was shocked by," O'Donnell said of the "Sister Act" star at about the 31-minute mark of the podcast.
O'Donnell also told Shields
that since she had experience producing her own daytime talk show ("The
Rosie O'Donnell Show," which aired on NBC from 1996 to 2002), she
wasn't used to "not having any power to make decisions" regarding the
content that would be covered on the show. She said that there would be hard news topics she was interested in
discussing, and Bill Getty, who at that time was the executive producer
of "The View," would instead want the hosts to discuss "the new fall
lipstick colors."
Twenty-eight years after appearing in “Now and Then,” Rosie O’Donnell is sharing some surprising insight about her role in the coming-of-age comedy.
Speaking to Brooke Shields on Tuesday’s episode of the “Now What?” podcast,
O’Donnell was asked whether she’d ever sign on for a sequel to the 1995
film, in which she played the adult version of Christina Ricci’s
character, Roberta Martin.
I don't like Brooke Shields. Sorry. And the way she kept referring to "the doc" and "my doc." How sad. She doesn't realize how badly she comes off in that documentary. It almost makes me feel sorry for her.
Rosie connects with her -- including when discussing GREASE on Broadway.
Rosie's always been a great interviewer. She knows how to draw a guest out, she knows how to make something interesting.
Wednesday, April 19, 2023. YOUTUBERS (those making YOUTUBE content for
the left) seem not to grasp that sugar rots the teeth and the brain.
What matters?
More
and more, it's apparent that most YOUTUBE political posing is just
posing. That's if they're left or just 'left.' That's whether they are
grifters or sincere. Spencer Ackerman would have been good to work in
here so let me back up to an e-mail. An e-mailer to the public account
wanted me to know that I ripped off Spencer and just mouthed what he has
said about the leaker -- mouthed it in yesterday's snapshot.
I
did not rip off Spencer, I don't know what he said. I wouldn't be
surprised if we held a similar point of view on the leaker. It wouldn't
be the first time. Our positions are often the same. Our tactics are
different.
His tactic for getting Barack
Obama the 2008 Democratic Party presidential nomination when Jeremiah
Wright was a clear problem for Barack (and would have been for any
candidate) was to advise others not to engage on Jeremiah just to bash
anyone who criticized Jeremiah -- bash them as a racist. Here's the
quote and shame on the MSM because they covered it and you go to find
out and you find out that they messed up -- most left the first
paragraph off. That's why this link is to the original DAILY CALLER report:
I do not endorse a Popular Front, nor do I think you need
to. It’s not necessary to jump to Wright-qua-Wright’s defense. What is
necessary is to raise the cost on the right of going after the left. In
other words, find a rightwinger’s [sic] and smash it through a
plate-glass window. Take a snapshot of the bleeding mess and send it out
in a Christmas card to let the right know that it needs to live in a
state of constant fear. Obviously I mean this rhetorically.
And
I think this threads the needle. If the right forces us all to either
defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the
game they’ve put upon us. Instead, take one of them — Fred Barnes, Karl
Rove, who cares — and call them racists. Ask: why do they have such a
deep-seated problem with a black politician who unites the country? What
lurks behind those problems? This makes *them* sputter with rage, which
in turn leads to overreaction and self-destruction.
Smash through a plate-glass window.
So
back to the point we were starting with. Garbage. That's what most of
you are offering. You think your conspiracy talk is moving the
needle? You think your nonsense is? Some of you are already wasting
time pimping a candidate (Marianne Williamson, for some of you).
The
war on the LGBTQ+ community matters. That should go without saying.
But most of you can't even mention that or maybe you spent this week
going over a man yelling -- a joke in his mind -- that women need to do
this or that and you just had to talk about how funny this year old
thing was. Maybe you were one of those two men and you didn't grasp
that if a man is yelling something at a woman, when a woman says it's
not funny, LISTEN. You stupid idiots. You never get it. 'We yell at
each other all the time' -- well, good for you, go swing your dicks at
each other. And then when you're done with that, go watch episode 5 of
THE POWER where Toni Collette's character asks her daughter what it's
like to be able to shoot electricity out of your fingers and she talks
about how she can go home after dark by herself, how she does this or
that now as a result. And then you might actually grasp why a woman is
not entertained by a man yelling at her. And you might understand that
when you admit something is misogynist, you then adding that it was
done "ironically" does not change that it was sexism.
And,
shame on you for that because, while you were still marveling over your
newly sprouted hairs, young boys, so-called lefties were getting away
with racism by insisting it was done ironically.
Sometimes
I'm just appalled and I wasn't planning on even talking about this, but
here we are. I did post a video and thought it might have something of
value. I got a call from a friend almost an hour later. "You didn't
watch, did you?" No. How bad is it? "You're going to want to stream
it yourself."
Not only did the two young men
feel the need to school women on a statement a pig on the left made a
year ago -- what a waste of time -- they then wanted to talk
entertainment.
I don't think the
two even saw ANT-MAN AND THE WASP: QUANTUMANIA. What's awful about the
film -- that damn title. It is hideous and never should have been the
title to begin with.
Otherwise?
I get why right wingers didn't like the film -- and I got it when I read the script, before a single scene was shot.
Yes,
they were going to have a problem with strong women and they were going
to have a problem with a multi-ethnic cast. But most of all, they were
going to have a problem with a film that questioned who is the
terrorist (it's not Janet) and who stands up and how do we stand up --
how do we work as a collective? I loved the final film. I also knew it
was going to be trashed. It'll live on and most MARVEL films won't.
But what surprised me was no one -- I thought at least WSWS would try to
offer some insight -- wanted to tackle some of the issues being raised
by the film.
Wrong.
So
the young men trash that film -- that they've clearly not seen -- and
isn't that really appalling. That's what they're using their time on.
And then one of them wanted to explain how dumb their sister was because the whole Red Scare was just about Hollywood unions.
Stop.
For the love of all that is holy: Stop.
Get an education before you speak.
McCarthyism
didn't start with McCarthy, it actually started on the Democratic Party
side of the aisle. The Hollywood Ten are endlessly covered in films
and other things which leads people to think that's all it was. No the
State Dept was targeted, to name just one other, and gays were targeted
and it's so much more than you know.
But, please, stop with the stupidity. 'Scripts are worse today because no one cares about writing'?
You
don't know what you are talking about. The studios have never cared
about writers. And writing by committee is not a recent fad. If you
want to see really bad writing, read through the drafts on MILDRED
PIERCE -- and really savor Faulkner's version -- yeah, him -- with all
its racist touches including Mildred serenaded with a spiritual.
Just stop.
So back to the main point.
There are two other stories that should really have gotten traction on YOUTUBE but didn't.
Clarence
Thomas. Some are whining that we have so much MSNBC content now. (So
much that I'm posting here.) You know what, find me the lefty YOUTUBER
talking about Clarence. We''ve pretty much posted all that I can find.
I'm sorry that his corruption doesn't interest the bulk of people
making YOUTUBE programs. But it's corruption and it matters. And it's a
story that people care about.
Then there's Duncan Hunter Jr. Junior got pardoned by Donald Trump.
Some of you YOUTUBERS insist that you don't want to see Donald back in the White House.
Where
is the Spencer Ackerman on this? (I don't mean Spencer himself. I'm
not aware of him having a YOUTUBE program.) Where's the person saying
smash Clarence over the head with the pardon and a get a bloody corpse
from it and put it on a pike in the town square?
Because Duncan Jr. has hurt Donald with the people who might have voted for him.
Duncan
Hunter Jr should have suffered a major media set back but YOUTUBERS
didn't want to amplify, they had too much more to cover, too much more
important things -- more important that Duncan is responsible for the
deaths of 2 US service members in Iraq and that he got off because he
had a powerful Daddy. Now Donald pardoned him for another crime. But
there are people recoiling to learn that Duncan is responsible for two
deaths and walked away without criticism or jail time. This is the type
of person that their stand-up guy Donald Trump would pardon? No, it
can't be so!!!!
Former
U.S. Congressman Duncan Hunter Jr. is making national headlines again,
this time for a
deadly, friendly-fire incident in 2004 during the Iraq
war.
Hunter is the focus of a new, NPR podcast, Taking Cover, a seven-part series of investigative reports.
NPR investigative producer, Graham Smith, and NPR pentagon
correspondent, Tom Bowman, spent three years chasing down information in
the case.
Bowman said it all began as a tip he received from a reliable source,
who told him about a friendly-fire, mortar strike that killed two
marines and an Iraqi interpreter inside a schoolhouse in Fallujah.
“We’re sitting in a whiskey bar in Washington, DC and he said there
was this friendly-fire incident back in 2004, during the first battle of
Fallujah, and it was covered up because the son of a powerful
politician was involved. That politician was Duncan Hunter Sr., then
chairman of the Armed Services Committee,” recalled Bowman.
Duncan Hunter Sr. and Duncan Hunter Jr. are both former U.S. congressmen from the East County.
In 2004, Duncan Hunter Jr. was a Marine lieutenant in Fallujah, Iraq,
stationed in a control center, involved in making decisions on where to
fire mortars at enemy positions, the podcasters said.
“We have the investigative report that we got from the widow of one
of the men who was killed. It has a statement written by Duncan Hunter
[Jr.], where he says he plotted this target on the map, he pushed in a
yellow pin at the spot of the target near the schoolhouse,” said Smith.
For three years, the families of the men killed didn't know the incident was the result of friendly fire.
Tom
Bowman's the sassy senior who just discovered podcasts. And since his
feeble brain can only hold one thing at a time, he can't also remember
journalism.
In the above, and below the excerpt
as well, Tom makes the story about him. The way he and G-Dawg did in
their first report, nearly fifty minutes long and they never bothered to
identify Duncan.
If you think I'm being picky,
the reason I know about the CBS 8 story is two NPR friends. I don't
watch San Diego news. They're the ones who called me to complain that
he's still making it about himself, that's he refusing to be a
journalist and cover the story.
The story is
Duncan Jr. and how Daddy got Junior off. And it does impact on Donald
supporters because Donald is so true and so this and so that. Some of
the shine coming off right now is people grasping that Donald pardoned a
man who is responsible for the deaths of 2 US service members and what
does that say about Donald's fabled brain and judgment and his claim to
'drain the swamp'?
Now it's not as fun as all
the other crap you're covering, I'm sure. (The two young men called out
above at least have been covering serious issues at other times in the
last two weeks.)
You offer a lot of nonsense. While pretending you're doing serious work.
You're not.
Clarence
Thomas should be front and center on left coverage, showing just how
out of control the Supreme Court is right now, showing just how
illegitimate it is. Rallying calls for accountability, rallying calls
for resignation. Calling for mandatory retirement and term limits.
DOBBS was a gut punch but so many on the left are ignoring Clarence.
That's
a real issue. Jacqueline Luqman is dealing with a real issue. On THE
REMIX SHOW yesterday, talking about what she saw taking place in
Venezuela on her recent trip there, that's a real issue too.
Any segment from BREAKTHROUGH NEWS is addressing real issues.
This segment of DEMOCRACY NOW! is a real issue.
John
Stauber chose to mock that segment but it's a real issue. Too many of
you are not dealing with real issues. You're taking up a lot of time
and space and you're wasting it.
If you're
someone working to make the medicine go down, mixing in some sugar for
that reason, fine. But some of you are not doing anything but sugar.
Yet you're applauding yourselves over and over in each YOUTUBE
broadcast.
On April 6, ProPublica published a damning exposé of Supreme Court
Justice Clarence Thomas’ corrupt relations with billionaire Republican
donor and Hitler-lover Harlan Crow. Since then, ProPublica and other
news outlets have published further revelations of financial dealings
with Crow and other sources of income either omitted or falsified on
Thomas’ disclosure filings.
The Democrats have responded to the
exposure of boundless personal corruption and political reaction on the
high court with an effort to effect a cosmetic tightening of ethics
rules, so as to shore up collapsing public confidence in the court and
every other institution of the state. But the entire senior leadership
in both the Biden White House and Congress has steered clear of
demanding either the resignation of Thomas or his impeachment. It is
well known that Thomas is by no means alone in accepting “gifts” from
the ultimate paymasters of the robed defenders of capitalism on the high
court.
ProPublica’s initial article documented the fact that for
more than two decades, Thomas and his wife, Ginni, have been taking
luxurious vacations on Crow’s super yacht and private jet to far-flung
destinations, as well as Crow’s private resorts in the Adirondack
Mountains in upstate New York and in East Texas, often mingling with
corporate oligarchs, the heads of right-wing think tanks and
anti-democratic judicial groups. The total cost of these annual junkets,
absorbed entirely by Thomas’ benefactor, adds up to the millions.
Since his elevation to the Supreme Court in 1991, Thomas has been on
the extreme right wing of the court. He was among the five Republican
justices who voted in 2000 to halt vote-counting in Florida and steal
the election for George W. Bush, the loser of the popular vote. He
signed onto a concurrent decision authored by Antonin Scalia asserting
that the American people did not have a constitutional right to vote for
the president. (Scalia died in 2016
at a luxury compound in Texas owned by John Poindexter, a wealthy
businessman and national security adviser under Ronald Reagan.
Poindexter was convicted in 1990 in connection with his role in the
Iran-Contra scandal, but the conviction was overturned on appeal the
following year.)
An arch-reactionary, Thomas was part of the Republican majority that overturned Roe v. Wade
last year. In his opinion he argued for extending the overturn of the
constitutional right to abortion to attack birth control and same-sex
marriage. He is presently conspiring with his fellow Republicans on the
court to restrict or eliminate access to the most widely used abortion
pill, a major step toward criminalizing abortion nationwide.
A
sadist, he has joined in rulings rejecting appeals by prisoners,
including death row inmates, who were deprived of basic due process
rights, leading to hundreds of state murders. He routinely votes against
all restrictions on corporate exploitation of workers and limitations
on corporate money to buy elections and politicians of both parties.
Thomas
has refused to recuse himself from cases related to Donald Trump’s
attempted overturn of the 2020 election, despite the prominent role of
Ginni Thomas in the conspiracy that culminated in the fascist storming
of the Capitol on January 6, 2021.
Crow, a Texas real estate
billionaire, has given millions to the Republican Party and supports
far-right think tanks and organizations, such as the Federalist Society,
that work to push the courts ever further to the right. In his mansion,
he boasts a copy of Mein Kampf signed by Hitler, paintings by
the author of the Holocaust and linens that carry the Swastika. He has
said that his greatest fear is Marxism.
Following the April 6
ProPublica article, Thomas dismissed the allegations of corruption and
violation of ethics laws, saying his forays with Crow were entirely
innocent personal gatherings with a “dear friend,” adding that he had
been advised by someone on the court that he was not obliged to disclose
such activities.
We'll wind down with this from South Central Michigan Greens:
