floribundas
floribundas
floribundas

Because the Cosby PR machine has now sprung into action. There's pretty much nothing Cosby can say that will ameliorate the damage of the accusations, so the PR tactic is to have his womenfolk defend him and undermine the credibility of the victims.

It reminds me a bit of when Arnold Schwarzenegger was running for

Yes. Excellent musical—tight pacing, witty, poignant, one of Sondheim's best scores. It doesn't have, however, either a chorus or a dance number. It's a singer/actor show.

Yes, men are supposed to be nurturing. In my opinion, anyway. As for the rest of your comment—I didn't make that argument and specifically said that I don't think it's right that Aniston's been put on the spot about her personal business all these years.

So, why don't you NOT spout reflexively without actually

My takeaway: she doesn't want kids and she's past the age where it's going to happen without help.

Now, here's the thing—even for women who never wanted kids, there is, when you hit Aniston's age, there's often a bit of ambiguity/regret/a questioning. Sometimes you end up seeing adoption (Diane Keaton) or

So, throw firecrackers and grenades away from you—i.e. down a street while you turn a corner.

Actually, I just don't find zombies that threatening—they're slow and don't have hire brain functioning, which would rule out non-instinctual movement like swimming or climbing a ladder. Plus, they're not working out, so

Yep. I don't know how some of the bigger shocks would have worked because I read about them (I was trying to see if I wanted to read the books—and, oops, Wikipedia reveals a lot.), so I knew all sorts of people got killed. But Lady S's return kicks the storyline into a whole 'nother category. It's not just

Olivia Munn made me quit watching—she was dreadful and the whole babe-standing-in-for-a-real-comedienne-of-color was annoying. Jessica William, though, rocks.

They did that during the drought in the 70s as well—everyone else was facing strict water rationing, dealing with brown yards, unflushed toilets and grey water, while LA, which has a huge chunk of the state's population, was swimming pools and golf courses as usual.

Still, agriculture remains the big user of water.

No, it's really not that nuanced, it's pretty simple—she has freedom of speech and that trumps your concerns. The journalist has freedom of press protections, which also trumps your concerns.

You may think this was a bad idea for all concerned, but *legally* the matter's quite clear cut.

It's actually more nuanced than you're making it—you can't deprive someone of their right to talk to a journalist because they have a diagnosis because you think talking to a journalist isn't good for them.

So, yes, she can legally consent. Ruby has rights even if you deem her unfit to hold them. You really need to

No. You're really, really standing on morally dubious grounds here. Legally, freedom of the press is a very strong protection here. Think about what you're saying here—you're saying a woman who willing contacted the media about her issues doesn't have the legal right to consent to be interviewed because she was

Oh, it should be for all people—the biggest nutjobs I've seen when it comes to Internet info are technically "sane" and "neurotypical." Delusional, wishful thinking is endemic to humans.

Yes, she can give consent. She's not a child, she's not a minor. She wasn't in a psych ward when she gave consent. Indeed, it's clear that she sought out media attention because she was upset by her involuntary commitment. I think the article is fair in that it does raise questions as to why she was committed.

The

No, there are shitloads of money and then there's insanely wealthy—Rowling's supposed to be a billionaire. She'd have to do something astonishingly crazy to burn through that amount of money. Unlike a football player, Rowling's still making money off her work—she's getting royalties from all those Harry Potter books

Oh I like Tennant—because he can bring it to a large variety of emotions. I'm part way through the Matt Smith episodes, I don't find him as interesting as Tennant—he's a bit wispier, though the episodes are helped a lot by Amy Pond who plays well off him.

I am looking forward to Capaldi—grump is good.

Oh, cool—Erastus Salisbury Fields! For some weird reason, we had to watch a film about him in junior high. I could never figure out why—I kept thinking that I would, at some point, find out that he was this major painter and that's why we were learning about him.

Only he wasn't. He's one of those footnote painters.

Moffatt wrote "Blink"— so I suspect ability's less the issue than ego and time management. It's amazing just how self-congratulatory and sloppy Sherlock gets in Season 3. Moffatt needs an editor more than he needs to be the editor.

Oh, I'll get there. I'm working my way through Doctor Who on Netflix, so I'm just not there yet. But I have a ton of Xmas knitting to do, so I'm counting on Doctor Who to get me through it. (I hate being broke—all this craftiness isn't purely by choice.)

I like Tennant's commitment to the part and he's great a lot

Just thanking you for featuring a pix of the Ninth Doctor—his stay was brief, but Christopher Eccleston is a fave Doctor of mine. Less manic than Tennant, more gravitas than Smith, sorry that he's refused to come back for appearances. (Haven't see Capaldi yet.)

You just know this started when a four-year-old girl's 10 year-old brother hijacked her big Christmas present.