NYT’s Accepts $ To Promote “Fearless Girl” Controversy

How fiercely crass is The New York Times? We’ll tell you.

On April 12th 2017 they promoted a “controversial” story about the “Fearless Girl” statue on Wall Street and how it turned the sculptor of the Wall Street bull rather peevish.

It turned out to generate massive coverage and feedback from people all over the world.

Great, you might say?

Not so great, we say.

Why?

Because the “Fearless Girl” statue was commissioned by State Street Capitol Advisors – Who The New York Times took Big $ from for a Big Ad in their same day’s Business Section which just so happened to blare – get this – “Sometimes Shit Happens.”

Well, actually, the ad said – “Sometimes —– Happens.”

But why be coy when you’re in bed with The New York Times and promoting yourself by ludicrously tying your corporate profits onto the back of the Women’s Rights Movement?

Talk about shame.

Shame on The New York Times.

Shame on State Street Capitol Advisors.

Shame on all those who got suckered into this false “discussion” of “Fearless Girl” when the real issue is about two corporations making a tempest in a teapot in order to generate corporate profits.

Indianapolis Company Angie’s List Sucks Up To Fox’s Sexual Harassing O’Reilly

As big corporate sponsors such as Mercedes Benz and Allstate withdrew their advertising money from Fox’s Bill O’Reilly’s TV program based on multiple lawsuits where he settled sexual harassment claims, the Indianapolis based corporation Angie’s List has decided to Stand By Its Sexually Harassing Man O’Reilly.

Cheryl Reed, spokeswoman for Angie’s List, as quoted  in The New York Times said, “Just as we trust members to make their own hiring decisions, we trust them to make their own media consumption decisions.”

Really?

By Angie’s List’s own logic, then…if a corporation such as Angie’s List CHOOSES to sponsor a PROVEN CORRUPTOR such as Bill O’Reilly, then consumers should CHOOSE NOT TO USE that corporation – ANGIE’S LIST.

Thanks for giving us that option, Angie!

Cause when Bill O’Reilly comes after you or your daughters or your friends or anyone you know, he’ll be smiling that creepy smile knowing YOU’VE got his back.

******************

Angie’s List has proudly touted their Indianapolis, Indiana headquarters location, knowing they are in the heart of Mike Pence territory where religious-backed Right-Wing politics rule the land and women’s rights are held in such low esteem that Governor Pence made it his policy never to sit down at a table with a single woman, fearing the supposed backhand of God swatting him across his dirty little mind.

AARP Members Surprised Their Fees Going To Support Trump

The AARP organization – a legal non-profit – is surprising their members with their full-blown support of Donald Trump.

The fact that the AARP organization has swung around to being a Right-Wing political lobbying weapon whose top leadership is so gung-ho on Trump has raised the concerns of many members.

Meanwhile, the CEO of AARP has been featured prominently in national ads trying to sell multiple services – unwanted by most Americans – instead of doing the good work she’s supposed to be doing: Assisting those 50 and over who are simply scraping by.

When an AARP mass email went out to members touting how The Donald is their friend, lot’s of AARP members questioned whether AARP was their friend.

Donald Trump has just signed an executive order giving carte blanche to Wall Street traders to seek their own profits irregardless of their client’s best interests. This means Wall Street can gamble on their own with clients money – gambling with retirement savings – without any repercussions.

Just WHY would a president eliminate the only laws in place that protect individual investors? And WHY does AARP think this is a great idea?

Protecting citizens’ savings should be the primary concern of AARP – yet AARP supports Pres. Trump’s efforts to let Wall Street steal investors funds.

Just who does AARP support?

ESPN Sucks: 5 Takeaways

1. ESPN is owned by The Walt Disney Company, a  corporation that rakes in $52 Billion dollars every year and is only interested in making many more billions of dollars.

2. ESPN makes a habit of promoting the most powerful sports’ interests.

The latest example would be their blatant Duke/Louisville basketball commercials where they make a hero out of Duke’s creepy, cheating Grayson Allen. Does it matter to ESPN that Allen has been repeatedly kicking hitting opponents and is despised by most Americans who value sportsmanship?

No. ESPN wants to make this creep a hero.

3. The number one mantra of every good American should be: “Question Authority.” ESPN will never question authority because they are invested in the status quo.

See a bad call on the football field or on the ball court? ESPN announcers rarely question referees’ or officials’ calls. Questioning authority upsets the status quo. Even though all of America sees what is unfair, ESPN people are blind.

4. ESPN lies by omission.

Before Alabama woefully lost to Clemson in the national championship game, ESPN already crowned Alabama the champ, reporting countless stories and video feeds promoting the invulnerability of the Alabama football team.

Whoops!

Then after Clemson kicked Alabama’s butt in the championship game ESPN practically ignored the results and ignored Clemson’s victory.

Why?

Because ESPN owns the SEC Network where Alabama plays. It is in ESPN’s financial interest to promote Alabama.

Clemson? ESPN won’t make money off Clemson. So they ignore them.

Everyone’s up on fake news. How about “fake non-news?”

5. These “Takeaway” things are just plain silly so make up your own for this last one…

PS: Dan Dakich and Kirk Herbstreit are the 2 exceptions at ESPN: They are both very good at what they do.

“La La Land” Lands With A Thud; It’s A Dud!

Here we go again.

It must be remembered that Hollywood is a world unto itself – a hubbub of a bubble; the ultimate echo chamber.

And this year the cries bouncing off that bubble and echoing around in that chamber is that Damien Chazelle’s “La La Land” is the musical masterpiece of the year.

We beg to differ.

After a recent viewing of “La La Land” with an average audience – not an “industry” audience, mind you – the crowd upon exiting was left muttering “what were all those critics talking about?”

What we saw was a mumbling, disjointed mish-mash with not one memorable song or performance. Ryan Gosling did his best with the material he was given but playing against Emma Stone he might as well have been hitting tennis balls against a brick wall. Stone’s acting goes from A to Z with nothing in between. No shading. We get the tearing, blurting bits that we saw so well in, well, “Birdman,” for example. And she keeps throwing that back at us.

As musicals go, this one didn’t. Go.

From the opening sequence, once the actors open their mouths to sing the words got lost and we knew we were in the hands of a second-rate director. The composition within the frame was crowded and without perspective, not unlike a smartphone user who’s never sure where the action is so they just point where the movement goes. Cinematography is an art. A cinematographer has a grand vision that encompasses light, composition, movement, depth, color all in a complex language that conveys a dramatic purpose to a film.

In “La La Land” the cinematography was non-existent.

And don’t give any credence to those critics who cite the beauty of the “shots” such as Griffith Park. A camera held still and rolling “film” on an object is not cinematography.

Most of the scenes in “La La Land” were so underlit that Stone and Gosling’s faces were in shadow. And when they are supposed to be singing, audiences want to SEE the mouths of the actors.

Dramatic tension. As in Chazelle’s “Whiplash” this film has a tacked-on, fake dramatic turning point that comes out of nowhere and appears in one scene at a dining table. Coming from left field, audiences are blind-sided. “Well, guess we’re going in that direction.”

Chazelle is still an immature filmmaker. Here he’s not unlike a trolley car driver who’s got his passengers on a trip then decides to jump the track. Passengers – except for gullible Hollywood-ites – don’t enjoy bumpy rides.

The most egregious example of a director who is clueless over what to do with a musical bit is Stone’s little audition song toward the end. It’s meant to be powerful yet, Chazelle has Stone frozen in place, not moving a muscle, under a hard spot, for the entire song. We’ve never seen someone sing a song as if they were standing in front of a firing squad, but this bit would surely qualify.

The film’s ending is an example of what happens when you give a director final cut. They always find a way to make it longer and confusing and waste any goodwill they might have garnered from the audience up until that point.

*********************

There’s more. Much, much more.

And we’ll write about that when we find the time.

At this point we’ll remind everyone to rush out and see Hollywood’s fav flick from last year – “The Revenant.”

Oh, you don’t want to waste your time on that boring slogfest, either.

Putin Plays Trump Like A Puddin’head Fiddle

There is precedence here.

It was a mere 15 years ago that another Republican president gave his personal appraisal of Russian dictator Vlad Putin: George W. said he looked into Vlad’s eyes and saw his soul and saw that it was good. That Vlad The Impaler was, for the record: “trustworthy.”

“George, George, George.” Or so his father, H.W. was constantly heard to mutter.

Now we have The Great Imposter Trump glowingly declaring Putin is “very smart.”

Well, compared to GI Trump, we must agree. On the intelligence meter Putin wins hands down against ol’ cotton brains.

First, Putin is a leader who has built his empire on top of his state’s extensive intelligence bureaus. Heck, Putin was brought up as an intelligence agent in the old KGB. When it comes to subterfuge and the effective use of intelligence in the exercise of power Putin is unrivaled in modern history.

GI Trump? He is so scared of the US intelligence agencies that he’s refused to meet with them. He has gone on record repeatedly refuting the authenticity of the intelligence agencies.

Intelligence! Shmelligence!

Can you see Vlad Putin in Moscow licking his lips at what a sucker he’s going to be dealing with?

He’s like LeBron James knowing he’s going 1-on-1 against a pimply-faced middle-schooler.

Game over!

**********************

Vladimir Putin is a master.

He supplied a guided missile that shot down Malaysia Air Flight 17 in the Ukraine killing almost 300 civilians. And nothing happened.

He kills his personal and political enemies using hitmen. And nothing happens.

He controls the media in Russia, controls the economy, controls politics, when he wants to stay in power he changes the rules for term limits.

And now, when he wants to control an American president, he plays him like a puddin’head fiddle.

And the Great Imposter, Trump, trumpets out tweets that are music to a dictator’s ears.

**********************

No. There is no precedence.

An American head of state has never sold the soul of this Republic to a dictator. Especially one as corrupt and murderous and dangerous to the world order as Putin.

And every other leader of civilized countries in this world agree.

Except for this incoming Imposter Trump.

New York Times Desecrates The Dead: Debbie Reynolds; George Michael

After the New York Times disastrous miscalculation on the 2016 election of Donald Trump, they have gone though a much ballyhooed reformation in order to present the world’s affairs to its readers in a – well, some kinda different format.

A very ugly example of this new format has been its coverage of the recent deaths of Pop star George Michael and Film star Debbie Reynolds.

NYT’s writer Wesley Morris threw out extended stories on Michael and Reynolds lives under the creepy title “An Appraisal.”

“An Appraisal?”

Those of us in the civilized world understand “An Appreciation” of someone’s life after they have passed on. But, an “appraisal?”

Appraisals are something you do to a used car. An appraisal is something you do to a piece of property.

After an artist has just died, you do NOT offer up an appraisal.

Unless, of course, you are a crass, wallowing-in-a-moral-morass NYT’s writer.

**********************

Need an example of some “appraisals” from NYT’s writer Morris? How about:

“Who the hell is gonna be named Debbie?” on Ms. Reynolds.

Or calling Ms. Reynolds “a casually narcissistic gorgon of a mother.”

Or his vicious hits on George Michael, just a day after his death, ridiculing his “butch” style or making left-handed cuts about his homosexuality.

Incredulously, this quat writer Morris puts this stuff out in a – yes – casually narcissistic manner meant to be chatty and endearing.

If this dude were ever speaking at a wake, we’re sure he’d end up buried before the person in the casket.

***********************

How about this: Since we can’t trust The New York Times to properly appraise our current political or world situations, why the HELL do they think they can appraise the lives of artists who have done much to add joy to this world?