StatisticalOutlier

Agree. Especially after the discussion about how much everybody spends just on purses. I always like to think that people with a lot of money make donations people never hear about, but they organized this stupid thing. $5,000. BFD. And I hate those stupid fundraisers--just give the fucking money.

NVM

Marcela and Sunny, in particular, kind of pissed me off with their disparaging comments about the lemon juice that comes in the little plastic lemons. I use the stuff in bottles, which I assume is the same. I would never use it in lemonade, for example, but I do use it when I make a pie that's just a graham cracker crust that holds sweetened condensed milk mixed with lemon juice, a little vanilla, a tiny bit of almond extract, with whipped cream folded in, and with canned tart cherries on top (in the spirit of the show, I'm keeping the quantities vague, to drive traffic to my website--I guess that's why they do it). I can't imagine that it suffers greatly from the use of bottled lemon juice. And truth be told, I've used reconstituted lemon juice from Simply Lemon packets, and didn't notice a difference. I do make my own graham cracker crust (admittedly from crushed graham crackers and not graham flour) and I whip the cream myself. I'm no cook at all, but I don't like the taste of store-bought graham cracker crusts, and Cool Whip kind of gives me the creeps. But I can make my pie without going to the store for fresh ingredients, and I HATE going to the store. God bless Trader Joe's shelf-stable whipping cream. So I found it annoying that Sunny, OF ALL PEOPLE, was dissing bottled lemon juice. I've seen her make concoctions out of store-bought processed crap that even I would be embarrassed to admit to, and she's on a cooking show!. And Jeff Mauro made creme brulee with pudding mix. Marcela said she can taste the difference between fresh and bottled lemon juice, and I don't doubt it. But to act like they just can't fathom how someone would use bottled lemon juice in any situation, to the point they need people to tweet them or whatever their presumably insane justifications, got my goat. ETA: I thought that bowl out of the roll of tickets was clever. Glad I wasn't FFing so much I missed it.

American Crime Story Ah. I don't watch that. Thanks, GB! Ha! Looks like they got their budget wrong. Should have been a lot more into branding, especially if it took away from the budget for incessant swooping and swirling camera shots.

I've seen Rev Run as a guest on other shows, and he acts the same. It's annoying because I kind of liked him on Run's House. But it's vocal fry without the fry, somehow. Might actually be worse, because I'm always thinking, "You're doing it wrong." This from a person who has stopped listening to interesting interviews because of vocal fry.

Agree with you on the belt thing, and for the record, some people do not consider it abuse even today. (Witness: Jo Frost: Nanny on Tour this week, where the guy whipped his kid with a belt WHEN HE KNEW JO HAD SURVEILLANCE CAMERAS IN THE HOUSE, and when Jo called him on it, he said they'll just have to agree to disagree.) So I can see that Farrah can say she was whipped with a belt, and Michael at the same time would say, "There was no abuse." I'm not going to listen to Brandi Glanville's podcast, but I have read the US Magazine article linked to above. From that article: The “choices” Abraham referred to revolve around her claims that her parents used to beat her with a belt for acting out, leaving bruises and welts all over her body. Well, yes, if you hit someone with a belt, it's going to leave welts. Maybe bruises, I don't know. So I can see that. But again, some people don't think punishing kids with a belt is abuse. Also from the US article: “At that time we really didn’t [have a relationship] because of some of the abusive things that had happened,” Abraham said of her painful childhood. “My parents got put into jail, both my mom and my dad.” Maybe it's the lawyer in me parsing things carefully (dangerous territory when you're dealing with either Farrah or US Magazine), but I don't think this necessarily means they served jail sentences for abusing her. Maybe they were arrested, but even then, are the arrests even related to what happened when Farrah was a child? We know Debra got arrested for pulling a knife on Farrah when Farrah was an adult, and maybe Michael got arrested when he was feuding with Dead Daddy Derek. Or maybe Farrah's lying about everything. Regardless, I'm not going to believe that her parents served jail sentences for abusing her as a child until I see some proof.

But it's not called Supernanny. I've been DYING to discuss this show but there's no forum for the new one. But if people will convene here, yay! I don't really like the new format. It seems like there's more filler than the previous show. I want about 10% background, 30% observation of kids being horrible, and 60% Jo putting the smackdown on them and their parents. That said, BostonBlonde, I notice you posted before last Thursday's episode, and before that, I was firmly with you on skyrocketing BP as well as the LOL. But I was wary about Thursday's episode because of the "on the next episode" teaser, so I was recording it, and happened to look up when the dad had the kid in front of him while sitting on the couch and I knew he was fixing to beat him, and I'm just not going to watch that. Thank god they didn't actually show it, and I had the sound muted but the captions were still on, which said: screaming Oh, hell no. I watched her conversation with the dad, where he defended what he did, and I can't bear watching that family, period, so I deleted that episode. I hate spanking with the heat of a thousand suns, period. But that poor little skinny kid, who evidently has learning disabilities? And with a belt? WTF? I love that Jo says to get down on an eye-to-eye level when disciplining a child, while this asshole couldn't be bothered to stop lounging on the couch as the kid presented himself for the prelude to the beating. Fuck you. I hope that the show goes back to watching people doing a half-assed job of the naughty stool and then proclaiming it doesn't work, and then Jo showing them how to do it correctly and it does work. You morons. I get a lot of joy out of yelling at the teevee, "NO! DON'T ENGAGE! HAVE YOU NOT SEEN THE SHOW? DRAG HER BACK TO THE NAUGHTY STOOL AND DON'T SAY A WORD!" Sheeeesh.

Tyler calls Cate "honey," too. It sounds very weird to me. I agree that it's very sad, and for the record, I don't have kids, and I don't automatically like a person just because s/he happens to be a child. Mistreating people you made the choice to bring into the world always boggles my mind.

There didn't look to be any landscaping whatsoever, and probably no common amenities from the looks of it. Maybe just taxes on the common areas. They said it was north of downtown, and actually said "outside downtown." There's an area up there where they're putting up lots of buildings that look like theirs, and you're right--it's industrial. Because of the interstates and railroads and the river, that area has always looked kind of isolated to me. And the agent said they can see Union Station from there; they didn't show it, but if that's the case, then they're probably looking over an expanse of railroad tracks and low-rise industrial area.

The Denver guy worked for a "national apartment developer." And yep, that gym was inside their house. I saw an exercise bicycle, whatever machine it was that she was on (one of those Tony Little gazelle things?), another machine of some sort, and a weight bench. Because they love the many outdoor recreational opportunities Denver provides. I laughed when the guy said all the white in one of the apartments made it seem "septic." I guess she didn't hear him and was therefore unable to correct him. I'm a pedant, but I would have let his "volumous" slide because at least you know what he meant. And I know they have to make up shit to talk about, but all that counter talk got on my nerves. She wanted dark ones so they wouldn't show dirt, and complained about the white ones because she'd be cleaning them all the time. So she wouldn't clean the dark ones? But finds even brand new carpet "disgusting"? Plus she's obviously young if she think that was shag carpeting. With the shag carpeting we had in the 70s, you almost couldn't see your feet. And solid color? Definitely for amateurs.

Too bad she hasn't seen these shows on MTV called 16 & Pregnant or Teen Mom, which are responsible for lowering pregnancy rates due to their realistic depiction of the difficulties of having a baby.

I was surprised they put that comment in the show. Maybe the carnival's check to TB bounced.

But what if it were Tom Jones? Among his fan base, literally peeing one's pants is entirely likely. So that one really could go either way, which is why the pedants must win this battle over "literally."

Looks more like a motel to me. On the interstate.

Speaking of teleprompters, I can't remember if I mentioned it here back when it happened, but a newsreader in India was fired after she called China's president, Xi Linping, "Eleven." All caps can be a killer.

It's never been my impression that keeping the combatants away from books is much of a problem.

I feel the same way. However, I have satellite TV and it's never been hooked to a phone line so everything comes down to me and nothing goes back up to the mothership, so there's no record anywhere of what I watch. Thank god.

That's what I was referring to, a/k/a the one that counts. I agree, but I wonder if things would be reversed without the influence of TM money. Maci would never be destitute because of her parents, but she definitely wouldn't have the high-flying life she has now. Without TM money, she'd drop down a bunch of notches, and maybe even struggle. Farrah would no doubt be a better person (not hard to do) because she wouldn't have the coins to be doing all this ridiculous stuff and might even had a real job in the food service industry. I don't think she would have built a career in the porn industry without her TM "fame." At worst, she'd be completely supported by her parents, which sounds kind of awful but in her case would be a benefit to herself, Sophia, and society. Whatever, she'd still be saddled with a child, unless she just handed Sophia over to her parents (I know I would), in which case she's in C&T territory. (And actually, I wonder just how horrible Sophia would be if she were being raised by a non-TM-fame Farrah. Yeah, it's still Farrah, and her grandparents are still Michael and Debra, but I think Farrah has suffered the worst from TM influence. I know I've suffered from Farrah's TM influence.) Amber, I don't know. Her "journey" has been so crazy I can't keep up. And I just don't know what a "good" life means for her, or for me when thinking about her. But Catelynn and Tyler? I don't think TM has hurt them quite as bad as it's hurt Farrah, but it's close. Without it, I can see them graduating from high school "for Carly" even without the cameras around, and then, with no TM money, getting a least some sort of job, and even maybe aspiring to a career, and (I can dream) maybe even working toward that goal. Sitting on the couch all day while planning their next tattoos and hoping Catelynn doesn't have anxiety attacks on their Hawaii honeymoon would not be on the table. I also think having to have a life and not obsessing about Carly (which I fear is because they're contractually required to) would have made them delay having another baby. It's tragic that they are the face of adoption on this show.

From your lips to god's ears. IIRC, that was their reason for graduating from high school. So...job's done.

I've always thought Luann's hairstyle seemed effortless, while Lisar's looks much more forced. My beef with her sleeveless looks has nothing to do with freeze framing, because it's the waggling of her upper arm as she swing her arms around when she's wrapped up in describing how kooky she is. I find it distracting.

That's what I really didn't get about their conversation when they were sitting on the couch (yeah, that narrows it down) with the producer. Amber is talking about if it's true that Matt has these other kids how she'll feel so stupid, etc., and I was shouting, "The man is sitting right there. ASK HIM. Get him on the record." And then do paternity tests, and...case closed. WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR??? In Tyler's defense (god help me), Carly is their storyline. I like to think that we see 100% of their conversations about Carly, every single bit of it. And the rest of their lives has nothing to do with it. I don't know. I can't imagine wanting my child to be Sophia's friend. And I think anyone with sufficiently poor judgment to want their kid around that mess of a family wouldn't have a problem with having their kid on any TV show, including this shit show. Right. Nobody else has mentioned where they met. All I could come up with was the basement of an Elks Lodge, but I think you're right--community center.

Well, Black-ish did it again. A year ago, I complained here that a character on the show had said, "Sharon and I's wedding." Then last night, they used "your guys's" as the possessive of "you guys." I really truly hope that's not what the script said, and that the actor, a teenager, modified it. But even if that's the case, SOMEBODY should have insisted on another take. I don't expect sitcoms to use the Queen's English, and accept that they're not in the business of educating the masses on proper construction of possessives. But it can't take any more effort to do this one right than to do it wrong. Doing it wrong will reflect poorly in some people's eyes, but nobody's going to notice if the character, talking to two people standing there together, says "your" instead of "your guys's." So why do it? ETA: Oops--make that "Queen's English."

William Hodgman's interview, defending the choice to file in Los Angeles from the get-go, and not in Santa Monica and letting the court move it to downtown L.A. if it wanted: I hate to rely on Alan Dershowitz because he's gotten on my last nerve recently for reasons I can't remember, but his speculation is: I can certainly understand this as a motivation, and actually agree with it, but Hodgman doesn't seem to want to admit it. That's fine, but some people have opined that one problem with the prosecution is that they rushed to trial, so I find it interesting that Hodgman's justification for filing in Los Angeles County, to rebut assertions that it was based on getting a black jury, is that they wanted to "get the case cued up, and let's get it going." Oops. So if that IS his excuse, it turned out to be tactically wrong, too.

That is a fabulous link. Good old Frontline.

After realizing his connection to both O.J. Simpson and Kris Jenner, all I really know about the guy is that he was a colossally bad judge of character. I'm not sure I can take much more of this show because of the camerawork. Could they not scrounge up two cameras and instead used one camera and a drone? All that circling and whirling makes me nauseated. And annoyed.