Genuinely loled.

Cool, fair enough. :-)

Ah, okay. Sorry, I wasn't sure—I thought that was likely the case, but didn't want to reply with agreement if you were telling me I'd missed something. :-)

…quotes the guy who was so infuriated at the suggestion that the UK may not be perfect in every respect that he swooped in to fling invective at everyone.

Okay, can someone tell me what Nameless Killer Gangster thought was going to happen when he opened fire on the shop his boss specifically told him to leave alone, even if he had not killed the man he knew his boss at least respected (if he didn't know he actually liked him)? Did he think Cottonmouth was going to be…

Well, her heirs ignored what she had to say about the book before ("I don't want it published") so I imagine they would ignore her statements about it from beyond the grave, too.

Ugh, I dislike fictional interviews (well, some of the ones done strictly for comedy are funny). I hate the popular "have the writer interview his/her characters," thing especially, and refuse to do them, for the same reason as it seems the writers here should have refused: they just end up being either…

But conservatives weren't pro-Reagan because he was a celebrity/actor, and he'd pretty much stopped acting well before he became governor and then President; in the meantime, he'd devoted himself to politics and done a lot of (objectively) good things, and he was SAG President for seven or eight years before he ran…

I don't think the general public necessarily treats them as such, but the media certainly seem to love quoting/interviewing them on various political issues.

I remember being told very specifically (on TV, along with millions of other people; it wasn't said personally to me, as I was a child at the time and didn't know any celebrities) by more than one celebrity that if Ronald Reagan was re-elected, there would absolutely be a nuclear war.

Lol @ "over-feeled it." Nice.

It's actually nice for the giver to have something in the background to listen to. :-)

Was he actually referring to her, though? Or, I guess he was, but I didn't catch that he was/think he was. I found that really disappointing, actually; they'd done such a great job with JJ in general, and really made us feel a connection between her & Luke, so to have him dismiss her so nastily seemed really…odd, and…

It's not essential, but JJ is an awesome show.

Lol, my husband and I had that thought, too. Geez, guys, why don't you just make t-shirts that say "I stole Cottonmouth's money and killed his men," and parade up and down the street wearing them?

Where does it say "Luke Cage spoiler?" I'm honestly not sure where the spoiler tag is (and I just re-skimmed the article and comments and am still not seeing it) but I know I assumed the article and comments would have L.A. Confidential spoilers; I did not assume they'd have a spoiler for a show that hadn't even been…

BTW You might want to look at that Connick Sr. story again, because the one (and only, from what I could find, although I didn't spend a ton of time on this) case where it was *proven* that evidence was held by the prosecution was pre-DNA, and it was not proven that it was a pattern or that it was deliberate.

I'm not sure what you mean by more vs. less terrifying? I wasn't talking about anything making the story more or less terrifying. All I'm saying is I'm very tired of the sanctimonious "But we can't condemn this, because bad stuff happens here sometimes, too," attitude that seems to be displayed anytime any country…

"Sweeping anti-British statements," really? "The UK might ALSO have this particular societal issue," is hardly a SWEEPING ANTI-BRITISH STATEMENT.

I guess Chapman there thinks Bush falsified the British Intelligence reports that were the justification for the invasion.