ZoloftBlob

No longer seeing patients is not the same as no longer being a doctor, nor is it the same as the implied 'not really a doctor at all but bunches of people at a medical school made her a doctor's badge and think it's cute to let someone they don't think is capable actually treat patients because its adorable!' business. Jen Arnold earned a medical degree despite her handicap. Jen Arnold worked for years as a neonatologist for years at different hospitals. When people claim she's not really a doctor and not really capable, please understand that is accusing the school she went to of fraud, and the hospitals she worked at of gross malpractice and really should require some actual proof since we're talking about a crime now - practicing medicine without a license, malpractice, impersonating a doctor.

But PBS would never steer us wrong! :) I mean, Downton Abbey, Poldark, Call the Midwife and that weird show on Nature where the robotic animals are attacked by live wild creatures! :D Also, they said the Persian Room was good and mmmm they weren't wrong!

You can't prove that you lost that customer if your company's name was never mentioned and the customer doesn't specifically say they left your company over your lack of donation to charity x. Bethenny didn't name any specific company, therefore specific companies can not claim they lost business because Bethenny said "99% of the businesses I approached didn't donate" - she didn't name specific companies so there's no way to know or track whether specific companies lost customers or what companies Bethenny approached. Since there is no way for a consumer to know who turned Bethenny down, there's no way any company was harmed by the comment. I like to think PBS would say "Please switch your support" - and honestly as long as they don't say "You HAVE TO switch your support", I'm pretty sure they won't be getting FCC citings. Since we have no idea who these people are, they weren't publically dissed. If Bethenny wants to be sour to friends, that's a) not a surprise and b) all on her.

Again, it's free advertising. And telling you that company X supports the charity so if you also support the charity, you may want to consider supporting Company X as they share your values is extremely common and not illegal. I mean, I have actually heard the phrase "isn't it great that these companies support Channel 8 and Nova? I know our viewers are proud to support our local business donors!" - please don't rat out PBS to the FCC.... Bethenny didn't mention any specific names of companies that didn't give so again, no company can claim any specific harm. That does indeed reward the company that gave, but there's absolutely no harm to any company that can be proven beyond them not receiving free advertising - that they may very well be receiving from their own separate charity donations that companies that favor Betheny's charity do not receive. Personally I think she could have phrased it more delicately, but her comment didn't cause any company any harm because she didn't cite any specific company for not giving.

That is a standard practice. She's being more blunt about the process but the basic reality is that companies donate for free advertising. I mean sure, some companies donate for genuine philanthropy but they also expect to have their name shined in lights. "Costco gave unlike others, they're the good guys" - this happens all the time and some companies even make commercials based on their own philanthropy - Tide for example, has a commercial about its laundry truck that it hauls out to help people wash their clothes. Again, that's just how it works. To use your PBS example (I love PBS) there's a restaurant (The Persian Room, if that matters) that is publically thanked at the start of Nature in my area that I actually went to because I thought it was great they were supporting the community and since they were praised, even tho the restaurant next to them was NOT cited as not donating, I know they didn't, because they didn't get the thanks, and it didn't get my business. That added boost of consumer good will and advertising is what the donation buys. Some companies are willing to pay for that good will and that's why they get mentioned and that's fair. Companies that don't? Don't get the free advertising or good will. No company was directly cited with a "they didn't give, don't shop there" - which would be unfair and harm causing - but you seem to arguing that Bethenny has to say "These companies gave and you should not consider that at all" in order to be fair to the companies that said no... and that's not how it works. *The Persian Room in Scottsdale is the bomb!

But to my point - those companies that choose to not donate are not being harmed by Bethenny, which was the original assertion. And it is a standard practice to encourage people to give their business to vendors who do donate. Unnamed vendors are assumed to not be donaters. That there is always room for improvement in handling charitable events is fair and I am sure Bethenny and her friends and people working in Puerto Rico will do an after action review and assess what could have been done better. She's doing good work but there's always things to tweek.

She's praising the companies that did donate so that people know who supported the cause. She is noting that some companies, that are not named and therefore not being publically shamed, did not and encouraging followers to support the companies that did. That's a standard practice. I understand you don't like that she said 99% of the companies she approached didn't donate, but that's not actually causing those companies any harm as they were not named. If Bethenny has burnt some personal bridges with contacts at those companies - that really is between her and those contacts but as far as her words harming some company goes? I'd have to know who didn't donate in order to change my spending habits and those companies weren't named.

Film - I'm gonna be honest. I just don't agree that unnamed other companies are harmed here. You may not like it but "Company X donated when 99% of other companies didn't" is not punitive because it's absolutely understood that if a company isn't mentioned by name, they didn't donate. Getting named is the point. I can't stop you from feeling indignant on behalf of faceless corporations but there's no harm to be proven here. No one knows who was approached by Bethenny and said no, so there's no punishment being dealt out.

I think it wants to be coherent, I know I want to hit the final episode and be awed by where it went... but part of the problem I am having is that I've probably watched too much ID Discovery to believe this really rather small group of people is running around sloppily murdering people in increasingly public places and aren't already arrested. 'Kai is doing this because Kai wants anarchy' isn't enough plot for me. And I do think that it's happening in a public, modern setting makes me nitpick things more than I would for say, Freaks. For example - Ivy is currently somewhat hesitant about the violence of the cult but it's now revealed that she knew about the cult from day one of the show. So when she agreed to let Ally check on the the restaurant alarm, she knew the cult had already murdered one of her employees - her head chef as I recall - for Ally to find. If it's all orchestrated, then she knew Harrison had given Ally a gun, and she knew she was sending Pedro to Ally the gun wielding paranoid. So Ivy has had her hand in two murders but is cringing now? No OTHER neighbors are extra watchful after the city councilman was murdered? No one else in this town reported the dead birds and trucks even though Meadow said it was done all over the city? Two different reporters are murdered violently on camera and that's not national news? Even after the cult intentionally filmed the second while chanting "Ave Satanas"? Expressly to get attention? And there was an unexpected but totally exploitable kinky sex aspect and we don't have Anderson Cooper doing live updates while Ana Navarro gives color commentary on the murders sweeping this Michigan city?

I do think cult cop was called Detective something or other in early episodes but the shrink has not been named. And I could be wrong about Cult Cop.

He never saw Ivy - she zapped him in the neck with the tazer from behind and when he woke up, both Ivy and Winter were wearing masks.

Ah, but Kai rescued him and showed him the true path to power, how to sacrifice blah blah blah. Kai isn't the two bitches who abducted him to begin with.

Actually I am quite certain Ally has been seeing the therapist since before the election. She references in the first episode, which was right after the election, that the coral was upsetting her and that she had been coping and handling that "for months" when visiting the therapist. Mind you, I am beginning to question the writing and whether they are really keeping track of things. The issue of Harrison being on tv covered with blood with his wife missing has yet to be addressed. This is a fairly small cult and a fairly large city - Beverly Hope MIGHT control the tv news but newspapers are still around and the cult is pretty sloppy. Point: Harrison and Meadow filmed Kai being beaten. They maybe could have done an anonymous thing with that. Harrison worked for a man whose body ended up in various different places. There's ONE cop in the cult. They don't control the police dept. Harrison and Meadow move almost immediately into the home of the murdered city councilman. Harrison gave the gun to the woman who then accidently shot an unarmed man in the house across the street. Harrison is on tv covered in blood declaring his wife has disappeared from his home, which again, just previously had a murder. Harrison is at a campaign rally that turns bloody. His *missing wife* is at the very least going to be found among the victims. This is just Harrison - Beverly's trail of bodies is also pretty obvious, and Ivy is hardly covering her tracks as well. The problem with wacky and weird killing sprees is that they attract outside attention.

Along with what the other poster said, I'd add that Manson really mined the counter culture for things to manipulate his followers with, and only had access to certain resources because of the summer of free love etc etc etc. He was a petty, not terribly successful thief without the hippie movement. So I will defend Ivy a little. Just a little. No, Ally did nothing wrong except have the baby that Ivy wanted all while functioning little better than a child herself. That's going to create resentment. It does not justify crazy murder. Also it appears that Gary has not been told that Winter and Ivy are the two women who forced him to cut off his hand. I predict this will be significant.

Very little, really. I used to teach karate. He's not being coddled in order to be on his second belt. Little kid karate, up until you get to the higher ranked belts, is pretty much mild exercise, coordination improvement, and your parents paying for classes. And believe me, his behavior isn't unusual for a karate class. But trust me - this isn't Will being coddled, this is that karate for kids that young makes its money on belt tests and tip tests, and it's only the higher ranks that have a chance of failing a belt test.

I'm honestly unclear what damage any corporation can claim from this. If they turned Bethenny down for donations, that's perfectly fine. She's not saying "Company Y refused to donate" at all. She is saying "Company X did donate to this charity, so I encourage you to support their business". That's how corporate charity giving works - if you donate, your company gets praised. If you don't donate, your company does not get a mention. This is a standard practice. If a corporation is mentioned, they donated. If they aren't mentioned, they didn't. If someone says "some companies didn't donate but Company X did" - since the non donaters aren't named, they aren't harmed except that they are not getting the good press Company X is getting. And if they didn't donate, they don't deserve the good press Company X is getting for donating, and they can't complain about that good press if they were given ample opportunity to donate and chose not to.

Unedited shooting is available on youtube. Definetely more directly shooty - people going down etc but not significantly more violent in my opinion.

Is the uncut version the pne that will be in the season pass if we're streaming it? Does anyone know?

Unfortuneatly, I really don't think this would inspire any legal action. If Scientology followed the pattern of other "rehabilitative boarding schools" - they have their butts nicely covered. People, survivors, have been going after these kinds of schools for years with sadly little result. Look up WWASP. Worse, look up Paradise Cove - a kid actually died there... and hardly anyone got in any trouble. It's perfectly legal in this country to put your kid in an abusive prison.

I think the problem is that a lot of the names sound similar - Ally, Ozy, Ivy. I'm currently willing to indulge the cult manipulating Ally so thoroughly because her shrink is in the cult and between the shrink and Ivy, they know how to press her buttons and wind her up.

Kids hair is weird. Look at pictures of Molly and Jeremy as young children - they're very very blonde. I think its possible that Ember is a red head but its probably too soon to tell.

It's by Maury Terry and available for kindle for 6.66 (heh) To be fair, it is much more about Satanism but everyone who is a Satanist in the book also seems to be attached to Scientology...

After, last season, it's pretty clear Amy no longer wishes that Matt would reconsider his wish to separate and divorce. I will say, it shocks me not at all that Amy doesn't parade her man in front of Matt or make a public to-do of making Matt see her with Chris, while Matt still needs to parade in public with his employee/lover complete with celebrating his birthday at the farm with all his guests...

Wright's book? I assume that might be a more credible source than my "The Ultimate Evil" published at the height of the Satanic Panic of the 1980s? :)

There's that. Tho as I thought about it, I think they're carefully focusing on the things they can provide witnesses for... the stuff I am talking about would probably be hard to track down at this point.