ahpny

I found Pilar irksome. So a guy must respect and honor a girl when the girl says no, a Pilar can go nuclear when Felix says no - to protect her and his relationship to her family? This’s pretty screwed up.

At first I though the Rod Stewart interview was somewhat of a non sequitor and off-brand for a political show like this. But it was nevertheless quite enjoyable and entertaining. I'm sure Rob Steward has many more stories to tell and he seems both gracious and skilled telling them. But I suppose in support of what Bill has said before, not everything needs to be political, and we should be able to enjoy and celebrate at least some things together. This is one of those things.

I think she told him because she wants it to be nothing but support. And it's not like he wouldn't have found out anyway since Missy knew about it, so it was definitely safer for her to tell him first I thought her preemptive notice about that was quite realistic and believable. I thought she did that not merely to avoid George hearing about it later (from Missy or otherwise), but to support Mary's own rationalization that it meant nothing. For her, if it meant nothing, there was no reason to conceal it. Thus, by broadcasting it unprovoked, she was trying to convince herself that it had no import.

Though I think AJ winning was the right choice, the piece that stood out for me for this season was Christine's self-capturing sculpture. As soon as I saw her preparatory drawing, I thought if she can create something that retained even half of the spirit of her drawing, no one would be able to touch it. And her sculpture exceeded her drawing. If any piece should move someone to tears of appreciation and wonder, this was it. It was beautiful and elegant and, if that weren't enough, projected a strong and poignant message with a singular grace and pride.

Really? She’s totally blameless here? What if the guy were 29 and the girl were 17, but lied and said she was 21. Would the 29 year old guy be blameless there too? She might rightfully be angry because had she known his true age, she may have decided not to sleep with him at all. But regardless of his falsely presented age, she did decide to sleep with him (repeatedly apparently) and she should accept responsibility for that. Moreover, she’s the adult, he’s barely legal.

Someone who believed Georgie when he said he was older than he is, and possibly someone whose birth control failed How does Georgie's fibbing about is age absolve Mandy of any responsibility for her actions? Is a 17 year old boy any less likely to get her pregnant than a 21 year old guy? Just as a party's lying about their age is no defense to statutory rape (which she's was only months away from committing), I don't see how Mandy is any less of an "idiot" than Georgie. Indeed, given her full adulthood as opposed to Georgie's 17-year-oldness, she's more of an "idiot" than he is. It still irks that he gets all the blame and Mandy seems to get none. But then again, she is the one who's pregnant, so I get it, a bit.

I'm all for Mandy alone deciding what to do about her pregnancy and deciding not to marry Georgie, but I don't understand the apparently one-sided blame falling on Georgie. If, as George repeatedly argues, Georgie is "an idiot," what does that make Mandy? Moreover, only a few months remove Mandy from statutory rape (age of consent in Texas is 17 - and I presume it was the same back in the day?). How many times have we heard "he'll be 18 in March." Especially as an adult of nearly 30, where was Mandy's agency in this? I was a little surprised that Missy didn't figure it out sooner, but she deduced the correct situation eventually.

I just couldn't get past two glaring fallacies central to the plot of this episode. First, as many have already pointed out, there is nothing illegal about owning cryptocurrency. Moreover, owning cryptocurrency is not the equivalent of tax evasion or proof of anything. While owning cryptocurrency in the amounts presumed here might reasonably raise suspicions of real crimes, that's nowhere near what could have lead Prince to be "taken away in handcuffs," as Dave bloviated. Second, others have also noted, while Dave may have the power to choose not to prosecute Chuck for extortion, fraud and misrepresenting himself as a government agent, her "fix" - preemptively obtaining some other type of warrant that Chuck would illegally backdate and lie about knowing earlier - doesn't really absolve anyone of anything. All that does in implicate her in a conspiracy that compound's Chuck's preexisting crimes. And just like Rein's sleepover, this will not remain secret. But speaking of that, I also didn't understand why sleeping with Rein was such a big deal, or why, in this day and age, that could possibly be the political blackhole that all apparently thought it was. Yes, sleeping with your employee is not a good look for a the head of the company (and a Presidential candidate), but at least so far, no one has been fired, threatened to be fired, demoted, or reprimanded for anything (though the ostensibly hypothetical discussion of whacking was worrisome). Nevertheless, the very fact that everyone is already looking at her differently and probably treating her differently, subconsciously or otherwise, means it wasn't nothing, and that's why you shouldn't sleep with your employees regardless of whether you're running for President. I wasn't aware this was the season finale until several days after I watch it. It lacked the gravitas of the season finales of many other series, whose season-finaleness was clear from the episode alone.

I somewhat schizophrenically agree with both A. Yang and B. Maher about the "slap." Yang's initial point was with so many other actually serious issues about which we should be worrying, why waste any limited bandwidth on this silly Hollywood problem? I haven't seen the "slap" and have no interest in viewing it or following discussions about it. However, I also see Bill's point. Yes - ultimately it's a tabloidesque dispute having little to do with bigger issues, but in its own way it does epitomize several bigger issues, including liberal hypocrisy - and that's why it's worthy of discussion. Hollywood is the lens through which many see Democrats, and that's another reason why this matters, even if it shouldn't. Bill's comments about baldness being no big deal reminded me of a Curb Your Enthusiasm episode where a chemo-caused, temporarily bald guy was getting an enormous amount of sympathy and pity, while Larry - continuously bald his entire life - got none. Bald people aren't usually the ones to dismiss baldness as no big deal btw. Having read her book (not light reading there), I wanted to hear more from the author. Cyber security certainly is one of those bigger issues that shouldn't be crowded out by the "slap." She was sadly almost totally silent in overtime.

Indeed I can!. There are may from which to choose, but you might enjoy The Biography of Nikola Tesla:: The Captivating Life of the Prophet of the Electronic Age. The Man Who Saw the Future and Made it Reality. Hardcover – October 5, 2021 by Emory Clark I should have also added another intriguing tangent associated with Edison contemporary with this period, though just touched on here as window dressing. The very existence of Hollywood and the reason it arose in Los Angeles is in a way directly related to Edison, and more specifically his patents regarding movie making. In order to avoid the movie-related "patent trust" controlled by Edison, nascent movie moguls uprooted their business from the East Coast and moved out of the reach of the Edison crowd to the then-far-less accessible West Coast (which also had the advantage of strong sunlight needed for the making early films).

You caught my "quip" typo, but I still don't think George's comments rise to a level of extortion, though that line may be blurry. The purpose of extortion is to obtain money or property. George sought neither; he wanted attendance at the ball. That's coercion, but not generally considered extortion.

Neither Russell blackmailed anyone. Blackmail is a demand for payment in exchange for not revealing a secret (and it may be a crime). Each Russell here merely demanded a quid pro quo, that is, something in exchange for something else. That is not illegal or even immoral, at least here. Nevertheless, it was kind of awesome. Seeing unkind people with power get what's coming to them never gets old. The "something" offered by each Russell, respectively, to Mrs. Astor and the guy who wanted a loan extension, was set in motion by not by the Russells, but instead by those who wanted something from them. Mrs. Astor "started it" by snubbing Bertha. Betha can invite or disinvite whomever she pleases to her own party. George Russell demanded nothing from the guy who wanted a loan extension until that guy came to Mr. Russell hat in hand. And the gall of that the guy who wanted a loan extension to castigate George Russell as "not a gentlemen." Screw him. George should have responded "As someone who needs access to my money, it is neither your concern nor your place to question whether I might, or might not be, a gentleman."

The true story of the commercialization of electrical power is a compelling saga little known by most today. It's actually more interesting than the foibles of the old moneyed crowd and ambitions of the new money people. It's not just the contribution of Lewis Lattimer (just hinted at here), but ruthless litigiousness of Edison himself (he spent more time in courts arguing about patents than he spent in any lab), his rivalry with Westinghouse and the criminally cruel sidelining of Nicolai Tesla, and the showdown between direct current (which Edison futilely pushed) and alternating current (which he savaged, but won out anyway). We all use AC today btw. The dramas write themselves and they're true!

This was the best show in a long time. All of the guests were good and the discussions were worthy and civil even when the guests disagreed (more of that in overtime). Everyone had good points and expressed them well, with nearly no over talking. Invite all of these guests back soon!

Rachel may not have been entirely "innocent" or likeable given her fame-whoring about, Instagram/Kardashian obsessions, and willingness to accept apparent largesse, but her most significant flaw is stupidity, or maybe just gullibility. And - at least in the Netflix version of reality - she blew her cross examination with multiple, unforced errors. None of the questions thrown at her should have been a surprise, and in a real court room scene, she would have been prepared to answer them in a way that would have minimized the impact on her successful direct examination (Rachel made the jurors cry!, as even Anna recognizes in frustration). Her direct should have preemptively defused at least some of this. Moreover, in her cross examination, when asked "didn't you accept all this crap gratis form Anna," she should immediately and sternly said "no." If asked to explain that, she could have followed up by noting that Anna never paid for essentially any of it, and as as Rachel now knows, Anna never had any intention (or ability) to pay for any it. So - none of it was that was "given" by Anna at all - since it was never Anna's to give. If you walk into Tiffany's and steal a bracelet, and then "give" that bracelet to another, that other owes no gratitude to the thief. And as any first year law student learns, you cannot get good title from a thief. The part that bugged me most, however, is that, whatever many flaws and moral blindness Anna has, she's clearly a very bright young woman who has the "Hannibal Lector-like" ability (as the writer noted) to see through and size up people in a manner few others have. That type of talent can legitimately earn lots of money (and maybe even fame). Yes, it's more work to earn it legitimately, so I suppose another of Anna's flaws is she's lazy and didn't want to work too hard.

Thanks, but I didn't watch (and will not watch) the Overtime segment for this show. I had more than enough of this crew from the show itself.

She was awful, and will luck, won't be back. And even though I'd never been a fan of P.J. O'Roarke, on this show or otherwise, I was still surprised the Bill didn't acknowledge his passing (or maybe I missed that while I was tuning out all the overtalking). I do recall when William F. Buckley died, Bill Maher made an unexpectedly gracious comment of that, despite Buckley having nothing to do with Bill Maher or any of Bill Maher's shows as far as I recall. Here, PJ had been a guest in this show many times, but still no notice of his death? I didn't get that.

George has already been shown to be both bright and realistic. But it was neither to "pretend" this never happened. Yeah, like that's going to end well. In fact, his "this never happened" stance was both stupid and unrealistic, and out of character as coming from George. Maybe he's a closet narcissist who sees women throwing themselves at him all the time because he just that irresistible? Maybe he routinely rebuffs them all with little thought because such is the lot of babe magnets like him. Regardless, it just seemed off.

One guess is that at least part of the reason why the "old v. new" was more complicated in the US than in the UK is because the US lacked any royalty-based aristocracy, and as a result, other arbitrary dividing lines (age of your "money") arose to fill in that gap.

I had to rewind to be sure, but I after I was sure, I expected some heavy-handed comment or cliché-risking speech from someone to drive the point home, but that surprisingly never came. Beautifully subtle indeed. Nothing more needed to be said, and the writers were smart enough to understand that and trust the audience. A fine example that often, more is indeed less. Wonder Years 1.0 had a full episode with Kevin and Paul's respective 13th birthdays occurring close in time, but Paul's of course incident with his Bar Mitzvah. The plot was Kevin's family wasn't really making a fuss about Kevin's birthday to the degree Kevin wanted, but he ended up sort of celebrating with Paul through Paul's Bar Mitzvah anyway.

He's the guy who points out the problems, if and when asked, but he has no control over any real decisions. Others might deign to solicit his view on the sufficiency of some potential fix, but he would not decide whether or not to implement any particular fix. As Axe aptly pointed out back in the day, "Spiros has no game." Indeed, he's not a real player. Confusion might arise because he acts like he is a player. Of course, that he thinks he is a player when he actually isn't is the crux of numerous digs and jokes at his expense.

This episode (foreshadowed by opening with another insufferable Che scene) and the series in general have been awful, but so many others have already mined every vane of awfulness that I won't pile on further. Nevertheless this episode was notable (though not necessarily in a good or bad way) in at least one aspect: having two cock shots (Harry's in the aborted blowing scene - which surely wasn't really that of Evan Hander & the obnoxious, sugar adverse, towel dropping 20-something). While as noted above, this wasn't unheard of in the original series, it was rare, while three of the four women there bared their tops, some repeatedly. SJK never did that supposedly because her contract shielded her from such obligations. But now that the three remaining women have a type of power and control they've never had before, at least towel guy's full exposure seemed like payback for all the times these women and others have had to show their tops for no good reason than the men writing and/or watching the show wanted that. I'm not sure this is progress, but it is different. Towel guy's attitude also suggested his exposure was either abusive, much like a flasher on the subway, or at least excessively arrogant, as in "I'm so young and hot you can't not notice."

In a decades old Seinfeld episode where Jerry and George are mistaken for a gay couple, the tag line, recited by almost every character appearing in the episode about being gay is that, while they are not gay, "not that there's anything wrong with that." It's one thing to express openness and tolerance of others, but it's another whole deal to accept it for yourself, especially for those brought up in particular evangelical environments. And Teslas (specifically like the Model X shown in this episode) are not hard to use and don't have a "key" or any physical lock. Instead they synch with your phone, though a fob is also available. It's not all that credible that Judy would be so confused about routine driving or door closing.

Nice choice to set the time-share investment location in Florida. For almost a century, investing in swamp land in Florida has been the quintennial scam that ends poorly for grifted investors. Indeed, there's an entire industry designed to get people out of times shares. How could the Gemstones, champions of grift themselves, fail to see that the Lisson proposal was more than a bit off? Kelvin's and Judy's apparent, mild skepticism seemed more a function of their rivalry with Eli than any arm's length assessment of the investment opportunity. And the primary reason Eli declined wasn't the pinging of his well-tuned BS detector, but his concerns about creating a higher profile what would attract the attention of the Jason Schwartzman character for a New York Times exposure piece.

What works well here is that none of the characters (well maybe accept Baby Billy) is really as bad as they initially seemed. They still generally suck, but all (again other than Baby Billy) have shown at least some positive qualities overlay lots of bad stuff. And thus, despite the satiric comedy DNA of the show, as in life, most people aren’t all bad or all good. Though I get the over-the-topness of it all, Eli getting shot by his wife didn’t work for me. By that single act, she’s arguably the most evil of them all, and never gets called on her shit. I don’t find that funny or amusing. Eli has to move out after she guns him down with some high powered special forces type rifle? That’s attempted murder in the first degree and as bad or far worse than anything Eli has done. I don’t care if he fucked a horse, that’s still well below attempted murder. She should have moved out, not him, and rot in jail.