99 Lustballoons Open Thread: The Charlie Rose Show Proposal

This *has* to be regarded as a trial balloon, since nobody who’s been in professional media longer than a week would ‘casually’ mention such a scoop to Tina Brown without expecting her to share it widely. I blame Donny Dollhands and his GOP enablers — those goniffs have cranked the news cycle for ‘powerful men acting out their worst fantasies’ so high, every other walking nutsack figures they’ve got cover.

From Vanity Fair, which has been at the glossiest intersection between pop culture and politics since it was revived during the Reagan era:

The question here seems obvious: who on earth is making this proposed series, and in what universe do they imagine viewers will tune in?

Rose was fired from CBS This Morning and his eponymous PBS show last fall following allegations of sexual harassment from multiple women; in a statement given at the time, Rose apologized, but denied the accuracy of some allegations. “I always felt that I was pursuing shared feelings,” Rose said, “even though I now realize I was mistaken.” Rose’s agent did not immediately respond to V.F.’s request for comment regarding the new project.

Why would anyone think a series in which Rose interviews other men who have been accused of sexual misconduct is a good or necessary idea? That might remain a mystery—but the report should also be received with skepticism, since as of yet, it’s unclear who is actually trying to make this series happen…

Without knowing who is behind this potential project, it’s hard to know how likely it is to come to fruition. Though one might think toppled Hollywood titans wouldn’t want to draw attention to themselves with TV appearances, such a thing wouldn’t be completely outside the realm of P.R. possibility; Ben Affleck, James Franco, and Billy Bush have all logged late-night appearances to talk about the controversies that have surrounded them in the wake of #MeToo revelations or allegations. And as Roseanne’s massive ratings success has proven over at ABC, Nielsen does not distinguish hate-watches from earnest ones. So while it’s difficult to imagine Charlie Rose’s supposed #MeToo redemption series making it to the screen—and it’s worth regarding the very idea of such a series with a large grain of salt—perhaps it’s best not to write the project off completely just yet.

One difference even I can spot: Affleck, Franco, Bush, and Sara Gilbert (the executive producer / driving force behind the Roseanne reboot) are all at least a generation younger than guys like Rose and Weinstein, and there’s evidence that members of top advertiser-desirable demographics actually want to see them on screen. Matt Lauer’s borderline — he might be young enough to pull off a comeback, at least on a cable channel aimed at the adult-incontinence-and-diabetes-meds market — but that’s even more reason he shouldn’t want to publicly bracket himself with the other ‘Cosby, only White’ putzes, yes?

176 replies
  1. 1
    Elizabelle says:

    Who is going to greenlight this one? It’s a parody, really.

  2. 2
    Corner Stone says:

    Where is the market for a Charlie Rose comeback vehicle? Is it aligned with the Megyn Kelly reclamation project?
    Who the F is making these god damned decisions?

  3. 3
    JustRuss says:

    I’d maybe be OK with this if they broadcast from Cosby’s prison cell.

  4. 4
    Corner Stone says:

    What skeevy ass power monger dudebro would agree to be interviewed? Even if Rose softballed the interview, if TV shows had the twitter equivalent of a ratio, wouldn’t it get shredded? And aren’t there any ongoing legal matters these guys could hang themselves on?

  5. 5
    Jeffro says:

    I like Schooleys suggestion tremendously

    Also, go check out Alexandra Petri’s latest in the Post online. As usual, unfortunately, the satirest has the truest take, this time about Trumpov and his Fox and friends call in disaster today

  6. 6
    Baud says:

    “Tell is how you felt when you realized you were the victim of a sexual abuse allegation.”

  7. 7
    oatler. says:

    This isn’t how I want to see Louis CK’s comeback.

  8. 8
    Alain the site fixer says:

    Once again, AL, your hed is the win.

  9. 9
    B.B.A. says:

    My advice to them is the same as Bill Hicks’ advice to people in advertising.

  10. 10
    Ruckus says:

    @Corner Stone:
    They didn’t think what they did was wrong and drumpf got elected.
    A few assholes might think they don’t look so bad in comparison.

  11. 11
    Steve in the SFO says:

    @Baud: well played

  12. 12

    Are things looking dire for the man in the WH? We seem to have more than our usual infestation of trolls/bots. There is one in the previous thread trying to make the Cosby conviction, a thread about HRC’s diabolical machinations.

  13. 13
  14. 14
    Roger Moore says:

    Why would anyone think a series in which Rose interviews other men who have been accused of sexual misconduct is a good or necessary idea?

    They think interviewing men who have been accused of sexual misconduct is a good idea because they want to normalize that conduct rather than prevent it. They most likely want to do this because they’re guilty of it, too, and don’t want to be held accountable when one of their victims comes forward. It seems like the most plausible explanation.

  15. 15
    Jeffro says:

    @schrodingers_cat: it’s their* only hope for the coming election- stir up as much shit as possible and get the Democrats fighting amongst themselves

    * I leave it to you all to determine who “ they” are

  16. 16
    jl says:

    I might watch a few seconds if Rose and O’Reilly did one while both were drunk off their asses.
    Well, OK, no I wouldn’t, except if there was a clip on youtube. Then, maybe I might watch clip, if a lot people said that it was funny or contained some kind of life lesson. (Edit: and it was short, very short).

    When is O’Reilly going to be in a courtroom over the NDAs he pressured his victims to sign? I read someplace they were full of fraudulent, extortionate, and illegal stuff.

  17. 17
    Kathleen says:

    Coming soon to PBS, #MeToo Boot Camp, hosted by Matt Lauer – in which victims and perpetrators go to a remote island where David Brooks counsels them to “see both sides” and warns victims they can’t leave the island until they “hug it out” with their perps.

  18. 18
    rikyrah says:

    You got to be kidding me😠😠

  19. 19
    MisterForkbeard says:

    @schrodingers_cat: Oh, that particular Troll does this constantly – it has no bearing on Trump’s own fortunes.

    Remember, EVERY event is a chance to discuss how Hillary or Bill personally failed you and is the real guilty party. Also, we should all feel bad for not wanting to put the Clintons in prison for their awful proven crimes.

  20. 20
    Feathers says:

    Whadda ya wanna bet whoever is trying to put this show together will turn out to have some #MeToo issues as well?

    Or they were just fucking with Charlie, knowing the idea would get loudly shut down and cause Rose only more grief.

  21. 21
    Enhanced Voting Techniques says:

    They can call it the “The Sexists Bastard’s Hour: Thank God Our Mothers aren’t Alive to See Us Edition” and to add insult to injury it will be boring too.

  22. 22
    Roger Moore says:

    @Feathers:

    Whadda ya wanna bet whoever is trying to put this show together will turn out to have some #MeToo issues as well?

    Unless it was intended to be edited into a point-and-mock format, that’s what I would assume. I think they’re trying to renormalize their misbehavior to avoid punishment.

  23. 23
    Librarian says:

    When I first heard of this, I thought it
    was an SNL sketch.

  24. 24
    trollhattan says:

    I would watch Gordon Ramsay yell at them for thirty minutes. Can we have that show?

  25. 25

    @MisterForkbeard:
    I have definitely seen an uptick in trolling as the elections move forward, but the ‘mysteriously appear during elections’ trolls focus on threads praising Democrats for something good, trying to derail them with an argument about whether some Democrat is bad. It prevents us from getting psyched up.

  26. 26
    Elizabelle says:

    The Alexandra Petri column. I hope she gets a Pulitzer one of these days. Way smarter and better than Kathleen Parker.

    … Donald Trump was still on the phone with “Fox & Friends” after calling in with a lot of opinions he wanted to share, against the best legal advice, and also probably the advice of his lawyers.

    The leader of the free world … spent half an hour ranting to Fox & Friends about his television viewing habits. The three hosts’ smiles and laughter grew increasingly strained as it became slowly apparent that the president would not get off the line unless forcibly removed, that maybe the president did not realize he had anything better to do, that the president would have to be reminded by the hosts of Fox and Friends that He Surely Had A Busy Schedule And A Lot Going On.

    “Fake news CNN actually gave the questions to the –” Trump began.

    “Yes, but don’t worry about them,” Brian Kilmeade said, as though it were an ordinary thing to remind the president of the United States to stop ranting about the 2016 debate questions asked by CNN in a debate two years ago.

    Then: “When you look at some of the others — you look at like a CNN, they’ll have a council of seven people and of the seven people every one of them is against me. I’m saying, where do we — where do they even find these people? I appreciate the –”

    “I’m not your doctor, Mr. President,” Kilmeade tried again, finding himself in the totally expected and fine position of having to urge the leader of the free world to stop watching so much cable news since clearly it was upsetting him, “but I would — I would recommend you watch less of them.”

    “I don’t watch things now. I can put it out of my mind and I never, ever thought that that would be possible. And you know what that does? It keeps you on the ball. It keeps you — you keep your sanity and it works very well,” said the president of the United States, who had called in to “Fox & Friends” to yell about the cable news he was watching, while everyone on the panel stared into the camera with the hollow, sharklike gaze of people realizing that hell is empty and all the devils are here. “But last night I did watch —

    “Mr. President, I have one question,” Ainsley Earnhardt tried, as though the leader of the free world were not shouting like someone she hoped never to sit next to at Thanksgiving again. …

    I wonder if Fox or someone else will put up a transcript. Cannot bear to listen to or look at Trump, but genuinely curious about his rants.

  27. 27
    lamh36 says:

    OT…but Ooooh…very interesting…folks who used one of thise DNA sites…how do you feel about this!!!
    I have my thoughts as it relates to HIPAA, as someone who works in the hospital, HIPAA laws are discussed often.

    @AP
    Follow Follow @AP
    More
    BREAKING: Prosecutors say they used online genealogical sites to find DNA match for suspected California serial killer.
    https://twitter.com/AP/status/989635359402283008

  28. 28
    B.B.A. says:

    @Roger Moore: I’d only watch if it was edited into a snuff film.

  29. 29
  30. 30
    MomSense says:

    @Elizabelle:

    Dear dog and all that is holy. Why would anyone think we would want to be subjected to more of those horribles?!

    I look around at so many beautiful, struggling artists, writers, poets, musicians, and actors who are working multiple jobs so they can create beauty for a world that desperately needs it. It’s wrong. We are rewarding the worst of humanity and I’m sick of it.

  31. 31

    Why not a Cain To Cain show, where a convicted murderer interviews other killers? Indeed, theres no limit to to the types of depraved human behavior that can be exploited for profit by disgraced professionals with a TV camera and an ax to grind (“produced by Charlie Rose”). Rose has surely met Harvey Weinstein. By all accounts, he’s got time on his hands. Maybe Charlie and Harvey can partner up.

  32. 32
    Jeffro says:

    @Elizabelle: she is a gem .

    Regarding Orange Crash ‘s rant, can you imagine trying to be the stenographer or transcript writer or whatever it’s called ? Yikes

  33. 33
    Barbara says:

    @Elizabelle: He’s going to waive attorney client privilege if he keeps this up.

  34. 34
    Timurid says:

    @Corner Stone:

    Who the F is making these god damned decisions?

    White people.

  35. 35
    ruemara says:

    @lamh36: It’s concerning. I’m thinking about getting a DNA test. I could use some ideas on genetic tendencies since I don’t have family history to access. None of this is covered by HIPAA but, you can have them destroy your DNA records. It’s in the agreement for Ancestry, not sure about 23 & me.

  36. 36
    Steeplejack says:

    This is why I’m getting through the Trump administration with cooking shows and HGTV-type “shelter shows.” And I’m hate-watching half of those.

  37. 37

    @Jeffro: @schrodingers_cat: the intercept is spewing an astonishing amount of squid ink this week.

  38. 38
  39. 39
    TenguPhule says:

    @Elizabelle:

    Who is going to greenlight this one?

    FOX?

  40. 40
    TenguPhule says:

    @Corner Stone:

    What skeevy ass power monger dudebro would agree to be interviewed?

    All of em, Katie?

    As I recall, they didn’t get to where they are now by being shy.

  41. 41
    TenguPhule says:

    @Roger Moore:

    It seems like the most plausible explanation.

    Alternatively, they’re idiots who think they can shift the blame to their victims in the court of public opinion.

    It works for rape cases all the time…what could possibly go wrong? //s

  42. 42
    Bobby Thomson says:

    @lamh36: if there is a reasonable expectation of privacy in an iphone and therefore a Fourth Amendment right to suppress the fruits of a warrantless search, I don’t see how one’s genetic makeup can be any different.

  43. 43
    sukabi says:

    Why don’t they do a convergence show…they can have the old, rich predators and the young doltish incels talk about their mommie issues.

    Edit to add, and nobody will watch that either.

  44. 44
    TenguPhule says:

    @Major Major Major Major:

    the intercept is spewing an astonishing amount of squid ink this week.

    Stop insulting squids. Their ink disperses after a few minutes.

  45. 45

    @Bobby Thomson: You cede a lot of rights in the terms of service that you totally read and agree to when you send your DNA in to those companies.

  46. 46
    TenguPhule says:

    @MomSense:

    We are rewarding the worst of humanity and I’m sick of it.

    Come sit by me.

  47. 47
    TenguPhule says:

    @Bobby Thomson:

    if there is a reasonable expectation of privacy in an iphone and therefore a Fourth Amendment right to suppress the fruits of a warrantless search, I don’t see how one’s genetic makeup can be any different.

    And this is why you are not a lawyer.

  48. 48
    TenguPhule says:

    @Baud:

    “Tell is how you felt when you realized you were the victim of a sexual abuse allegation.”

    “Please show us on the doll where the women touched your subpoena.”

  49. 49
    Steeplejack says:

    @Baud:

    “Show us on the doll where you touched the women.”

  50. 50
    Baud says:

    @Timurid:

    Who the F is making these god damned decisions?

    White people.

    And possibly Kanye.

  51. 51
    Citizen_X says:

    Maybe they’re inspired by Trump to make a TV show whose premise is, “Let’s say shit that’s practically calculated to make our lawyers blow their brains out.”

  52. 52
    sukabi says:

    @Corner Stone: rich, old white guys.

  53. 53
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @LanceThruster: Economy of effort.

  54. 54
    Jeffro says:

    @Major Major Major Major: yup

    You know a really savvy and strategic Democratic politician might want to get out in front of this and go on a media blitz noting that given the blue tsunami that is coming the only hope the Republicans and Russians (but I repeat myself) have is for Democrats to fight amongst themselves

    And call for every potential future Democratic candidate to pledge now that they will support the eventual nominee

  55. 55
    sukabi says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: were we supposed to bring our p0rn names to play on this thread?

  56. 56
    bcw says:

    They needed to move faster on this – now it looks like Bill Cosby can’t write the opening monologue – he’ll be working on other sentences.

  57. 57
    Baud says:

    @Jeffro:

    And call for every potential future Democratic candidate to pledge now that they will support the eventual nominee

    And when certain people refuse, the civil war begins. Let’s get through the midterms first.

  58. 58
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @sukabi: Who am I to spoil your fun?

  59. 59

    @Jeffro: then the usual suspects will just go on about how the DNC keeps using the Russia nothingburger to distract from how they stole the primary from Bernie.

  60. 60
    maya says:

    In keeping with the recent Guadalcanal vet search, they’re going to call this historic campaign, A Bill-O for My Helmet.

  61. 61
    ruemara says:

    @Timurid: To be completely offensive, I was reminded of this song. It’s terrible and wrong but funny, so there.

  62. 62
    Kay says:

    I never watched Charlie Rose. I missed his whole career. He looks scary in that photo though- like he’s had a crazy amount of cosmetic surgery. He should so a show about men and cosmetic surgery. I might watch that.

  63. 63
    TenguPhule says:

    @Baud:

    Let’s get through the midterms first.

    I’m afraid that was for the midterms.

  64. 64
    sukabi says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: just wondering as we’ve got a new jouster.

  65. 65
    MomSense says:

    @Kay:

    How about an infomercial on men and plastic surgery. You too can look like a burn victim.

  66. 66
    Corner Stone says:

    @sukabi:

    were we supposed to bring our p0rn names to play on this thread?

    Mine is Rip Torn.

  67. 67
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @sukabi: He’s been around for years.

  68. 68
    ruemara says:

    @Major Major Major Major: A “friend” was sharing the latest Intercept nonsense about how a True Progressive was asked to leave a race by the evil Dems. With a bunch of his dudebro friends yakking about the terribleness of Dems & Debbie Wasserman Schulz & how both The Republicans & The Dems have sold out the country yadda yadda & Bernie was robbed. It just feels like the 2016 playbook all over again for those so damned smart they don’t know how utterly stupid & manipulable they are.

  69. 69
    Mary G says:

    They showed the Cosby victims coming out of the courtroom after the verdict, and they were laughing and sobbing at the same time. I am happy for them all, even if their particular case receives no punishment.

  70. 70
    TenguPhule says:

    And Scott Pruitt doubled down in front of Congress.

    He is not going to be held to account by the legal system and is daring them to try.

  71. 71
    Corner Stone says:

    @Citizen_X:

    Maybe they’re inspired by Trump to make a TV show whose premise is, “Let’s say shit that’s practically calculated to make our lawyers blow their brains out.”

    I am picturing a “Deal or No Deal” style format. Where lawyers have to choose briefcases with people’s names in them. If they open the Trump one they lose all their clients, homes, wealth, mistresses and family.

  72. 72
    TenguPhule says:

    @Corner Stone: Free Willy.

  73. 73
    JPL says:

    @Kay: The Charlie Rose show was in TX in the early eighties. Since I have listened or watched him since then, I was shocked. Now the comeback plan is just sick.

  74. 74
    Citizen Alan says:

    @Bobby Thomson:

    I’m pretty sure that you wave your privacy interests in your own DNA when you throw away a plastic cup you’ve been drinking out of and a policeman picks it up. I would be stunned if the genealogy sites offer anything resembling confidentiality two people who voluntarily spit on to swabs and send it to them through the US mail.

  75. 75

    @ruemara: I clicked on that piece just to keep abreast of the situation and my god Lee Fang is an idiot. I got as far as the note saying that the candidate who made the recording asked them not to release “personal” details, and so The Intercept “decided which parts were newsworthy.”

  76. 76
    TenguPhule says:

    @Corner Stone:

    If they open the Trump one they lose all their clients, homes, wealth, mistresses and family.

    And if they open the Putin one they have to commit suicide and stuff themselves into a duffel bag afterwards.

  77. 77
    sukabi says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: really? Don’t remember seeing the name before.

  78. 78
    Kay says:

    @MomSense:

    Shiny. I don’t know when I realized so many men were getting it. It’s one of those things-once you see it you can’t stop seeing it. Now it’s practically a hobby of mine, spotting it.

    Whatever Putin did to his face is just tragic. Boy did he get bad advice. Maybe they’re scared to tell him no- they’ll fall out a window.

  79. 79

    @sukabi: been around long enough for me to have had already pied him.

  80. 80
    LanceThruster says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    Got it, OO.

  81. 81
    Wapiti says:

    @lamh36: Regarding the use of DNA: in the mid-90s, the US Army’s primary method of casualty identification was switched from panoramic dental xrays to DNA tests. Which was probably a net good, and they promised that the DNA would only be used for identifying remains.

    The promise lasted a good 4 or 6 years until they had a series of unsolved rapes on a military post, at which time they just ran a comparison of the DNA from all the male soldiers on post vs. the unknown perp’s. So… they got the guy, which was good, and drove home that we didn’t really expect privacy, did we?

    So they have mine on file, because I was serving my country, and some days I think they should just sample everyone to make it fair.

  82. 82
    SRW1 says:

    I remember the days when Larry King was was assigned the task of rehabilitating slime balls through pseudo-tough interviews.

    That niche is in need of someone filling it.

  83. 83
    StringOnAStick says:

    @Steeplejack:

    This is why I’m getting through the Trump administration with cooking shows and HGTV-type “shelter shows.” And I’m hate-watching half of those.

    We’ve cut the cord, but if it wasn’t for the Create channel and Netflix we could get rid of the TV. My husband has been away for the past 2 weeks and I think I finally turned the thing on last night for the first time since he left just to have some quiet background chatter. Though I will admit to guilty pleasure watching of House Hunters when it is available somewhere else just so we can make fun of stupid reasons for turning down a house, like “we don’t like the paint”. Seriously, you are incapable of painting things a different color? I Notice how they seem to always talk people into going above their budget. Who is the real sponsor of those shows, the real estate industry? Mortgage companies? Hannity’s foreclosure specialists? My cynicism level in the age of Dump is too high to handle these contrived shows sometimes.

  84. 84
    jl says:

    @Kay: I’m a guy, and I can’t tell from the pic of Rose. I have lousy ‘plastic face’-dar. If he drinks like people say he does, he must need it or he’d look even worse, a total wreck.

  85. 85
    Baud says:

    @Major Major Major Major: Vox ran with that too.

  86. 86

    @Baud: I was 100% prepared to care until I saw that the Intercept was in charge of redactions.

  87. 87
    Baud says:

    @Major Major Major Major:

    Poor Reality Winner.

  88. 88
    Jeffro says:

    @Major Major Major Major: yeah, well, we’re pretty far past most folks’ ability to go with “nothingburger”, especially if you’re a Dem. I think last I saw (and this was a couple of months ago) over 80% of Dems think the Russia ‘thing’ is real.

    I don’t think it’ll fly…and between now and 2020 there’s about a 457% possibility that there will be vast amounts of indictments dropped on Trumpov & Co’s heads. But whatever makes his supporters happy…

  89. 89
    patroclus says:

    Well, I’ll at least admit to being conflicted about what should be the result when a prominent male is accused of multiple womanizing allegations. To me, it depends on the facts and circumstances of each incident and the context in which they were alleged to have occurred. And I’m not likely to ever know the precise details unless, like Cosby, there’s a trial and evidence is presented in accordance with due process. And there’s clearly a difference between mild harassment and actual assault or rape. And whether the situation was consensual. Should they all just be made to go away and be ostracized? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. It depends. Cosby’s been convicted – that’s easy, he should go to jail. Charlie Rose – I’m inclined to think he should retire and stay retired. Bill O’Reilly – same thing. But, one of the original examples of this was Gary Hart and I think that was vastly overdone and he shouldn’t have been run out of town on a rail, never to be paid attention to ever again. And I put Al Franken in that category as well. JFK would probably have never survived the current mentality; nor others who we regard historically as important figures. And to me, there’s a difference between public officials and journalists or entertainers. The Affleck Brothers and Kevin Spacey are different from Mark Foley, Anthony Weiner or Eliot Spitzer in my view. And certainly Trump or Clinton. There just isn’t an easy answer because all the situations differ and I’m suspicious of those who take hard positions on every case; either always condemnatory or always exculpatory.

  90. 90
    LanceThruster says:

    @Major Major Major Major:

    “Early in life I have noticed that no event is ever correctly reported in a newspaper, but in Spain, for the first time, I saw newspaper reports which did not bear any relation to the facts, not even the relationship which is implied in an ordinary lie. I saw great battles reported where there had been no fighting, and complete silence where hundreds of men had been killed. I saw troops who had fought bravely denounced as cowards and traitors, and others who had never seen a shot fired hailed as the heroes of imaginary victories; and I saw newspapers in London retailing these lies and eager intellectuals building emotional superstructures over events that had never happened. I saw, in fact, history being written not in terms of what happened but of what ought to have happened according to various ‘party lines’.”

    George Orwell, Looking back on the Spanish War, Chapter 4

    H/t Moon of Alabama

  91. 91

    @Baud: Not really a winner in reality.

  92. 92

    @Omnes Omnibus: You asked and he answered.
    Also too, either DougJ is trying a new persona or we have a new R troll. opiejeanne (sp?) called it yesterday.

  93. 93
    Jeffro says:

    @ruemara: Ask the friend if he really, truly thinks that Dem cabinet nominees would be even in the game Galaxy of Bad as Pruitt, Mulvaney, Carson, and DeVos. Just for starters.

    Or the tax bill – if that would have turned out the same.

    Or the Muslim ban.

    Or the trans ban in the military.

    “No difference between the parties” is so. fucking. lazy. It’s almost as intellectually lazy as being an airquote “libertarian”

  94. 94
    Corner Stone says:

    @patroclus: Gary Hart was reclaimed and achieved “Elder Statesmen” after that all settled down.
    I am still pissed off about Elliot Spitzer. He may have been an arrogant asshole who let his critics take him out but he could have really been a force in the D party.

  95. 95
  96. 96
    ruemara says:

    @Jeffro: Oh, they’re too far gone. Way too far gone. A good 3 feet up their own colon gone.

  97. 97
    patroclus says:

    On the DNA thing, my brother sent his in to ancestry and then my sister did too. It’s nice to know that I’m mostly Northern European (I kind of already knew that) and probably 1/1028th Jewish, but now I can’t go commit crimes or the Gattaca-like police are going to catch me. Arrgh – I’ll never forgive them…

  98. 98

    @Major Major Major Major: Karen Potter, its some performance art, with odd grammar.

  99. 99
    Baud says:

    I wonder how many families have broken up due to DNA testing.

  100. 100
    Mary G says:

    No technology is infallible:

    Here it is! The story: Police linked DNA evidence from 40 different crimes to a single woman. She turned out to just work for the cotton swab manufacturer. Hat Tip: @MickWest and @milesoutsides CC: @BariAWilliams https://t.co/tTlf1ROBDP— Erin Biba (@erinbiba) April 26, 2018

  101. 101
    lollipopguild says:

    @Corner Stone: Dash Riprock, Biff Hardtack, Beef Jerky.

  102. 102

    @schrodingers_cat: I tend to get a bit suspicions when a new person shows up and is really chatty.

    ETA: OTOH, I used to be much more chatty back when I was drinking.

  103. 103
    patroclus says:

    @Corner Stone: Not really. He never again held any public office. He did serve on some commissions – one of which specifically warned about a possible 9/11 like event just a few months before it actually occurred. No one paid any attention; certainly not like they would have had Kissinger or Nixon had similarly given a warning.

  104. 104
    MomSense says:

    @Steeplejack:

    Right there with you.

  105. 105

    @Baud: How accurate are those things. I am skeptical.

  106. 106
  107. 107
  108. 108
    Jeffro says:

    @ruemara: Eww.

    Also, I meant same Galaxy of Bad, but clearly you deciphered that already, thank you.

    I’d like to revise my earlier comparison if that’s ok: “both parties are the same” is actually lazier and stupider than being an airquote “libertarian”. It’s like the difference between lying and fiction. Fiction actually takes some effort.

  109. 109
    StringOnAStick says:

    @lamh36

    : @AP
    Follow Follow @AP
    More
    BREAKING: Prosecutors say they used online genealogical sites to find DNA match for suspected California serial killer.
    https://twitter.com/AP/status/989635359402283008

    Well, there goes the lucrative market for casual geneology research by serial killers I guess. I should have known something was up when the arrest was first announced yesterday, with the police saying they are sure they had the right guy followed by some cryptic comment that how they got the DNA data would “be released later”. That last bit stuck out in my mind, and now I know why.

    Seriously though, it does seem like a huge HIPPA violation though I am sure you signed away that right when you agreed to use their service. I would suspect that there have been executive suite meetings today at Ancestry and 23 and Me, wondering how this revelation that their data is searchable by law enforcement is going to cut into the number of people interested in using their services. I have a long standing concern about genetic testing and health insurance companies finding ways to dig into that data.

  110. 110
    RSA says:

    @Jeffro:

    Also, go check out Alexandra Petri’s latest in the Post online.

    I thought Petri was making up her quotes. She was not. OMG.

  111. 111
    Formerly disgruntled in Oregon says:

    @Major Major Major Major: I thought Longman had a good take on this, despite the crappy headline. WaMo link

    In short: Dem orgs should be honest and transparent about making endorsements and helping candidates, and The Intercept’s Rita Skeeter-esque misleading bullshit about this incident makes it harder to have an honest discussion about the issue.

  112. 112
    TenguPhule says:

    @🐾BillinGlendaleCA:

    Not really a winner in reality.

    But reality won in the end.

  113. 113
    Kay says:

    I’ve been watching “Alone” which is exactly as sad as it sounds. It’s about 10 people who go to an island in British Columbia and have to camp alone for days and days – months- to win 500k. Last man standing. I calculate how much the winner stands to make per day- obviously it goes down the longer they hold out. One man left in like 3 hours- before it got dark- so there doesn’t seem to be a minimum stay. I think they should get together at the start and have each person leave one day later than the one before and then split the winnings. They could all be done in 11 days and all make some money and really it’s fairly boring to watch- 11 days is plenty. There are only so many “bears snuffling around the lean-to” one can watch. You could do one hour apart but I’m afraid the producers would catch on to that scheme.

  114. 114
    Corner Stone says:

    @patroclus: That’s….kind of what an Elder Statesmen is.

  115. 115

    @TenguPhule: Reality always wins in the end.

  116. 116
    TenguPhule says:

    @Mary G:

    She turned out to just work for the cotton swab manufacturer

    Cue tips to police.

  117. 117
    TenguPhule says:

    @Kay:

    I think they should get together at the start and have each person leave one day later than the one before and then split the winnings. They could all be done in 11 days and all make some money and really it’s fairly boring to watch- 11 days is plenty.

    This idea has been scientifically tested before. It never works well unless you have an effective enforcement method to ensure that the final person doesn’t rip the others off.

  118. 118
    TenguPhule says:

    @Kay:

    I’ve been watching “Alone” which is exactly as sad as it sounds.

    /Resist urge to make joke in poor taste

  119. 119
    patroclus says:

    @Corner Stone: Not really – if he had been a former Sec. of State or former President, he might have made a difference. He didn’t – 3000 people died. A mere member of a think tank or commission is not the same thing at all.

    Speaking of the Intercept, Dear Leader Greenwald is on a jag about Joy Reid. I’m conflicted about that too.

  120. 120
    Gin & Tonic says:

    @StringOnAStick: Since I’m a pedant, it’s HIPAA, not HIPPA. And neither of those companies are health care providers, so there’s no HIPAA relationship.

  121. 121
    Kay says:

    @TenguPhule:

    Oh, I’m sure. Plus they’d have this secret that would bind them together FOR LIFE. Someone will crack :)

  122. 122
    Corner Stone says:

    @patroclus: Whatever, fucknuts.
    “an eminent senior member of a group or organization; especially : a retired statesman who unofficially advises current leaders “

  123. 123
  124. 124
    TenguPhule says:

    @patroclus:

    Dear Leader Greenwald is on a jag about Joy Reid. I’m conflicted about that too.

    Always root against GG.

  125. 125
    Kay says:

    @TenguPhule:

    I read this thing once about heat waves in Chicago. You know they have those deadly heat waves where elderly people die. So people think it’s all about bootsrapping and taking care of yourself but it’s the opposite. “Cooperative” communities do best in stress situations. I think “Alone” is just wrong. It just makes sense to have the lean-to builder trade work with the fisherwoman – it’s efficient- and they won’t be lonely and miserable.

  126. 126
    StringOnAStick says:

    do @Gin & Tonic: It’s still a type of medical data though is it not? I know someone that has the genetic version of ALS through the last 3 generations of their family; 10% of ALS is genetic, the rest is idiopathic. They individually decided to be tested in order to make decisions about whether to parent or not but did a lot of searching to make sure they could get the tests done without having their names attached since a positive would make them un-insurable given the cost of that disease. Is just casually sending your fluids off for DNA testing really that good of an idea?

    And as far as the pendant thing goes, my comments about Novocaine are a hint that using wrong terminology tends to get you less listened to in both medicine and dentistry. My mom talks to her doctor about “ostesporosis” like it’s a fungal disease, it makes them question your abilities a little and that becomes more of a potential issue with age. How do you assess interactions with people who use your profession’s jargon incorrectly, does it make you wonder a bit about how competent they are? I’m trying to help here because being as accurate as you can when dealing with medical or dental people you don’t know can be an issue, but you know, be mean, it seems to work for you. Oh and I misspelled HIPAA because Kindles suck to type on.

  127. 127

    @patroclus: Joy Reid is acting pretty stupid about this IMO.

  128. 128
    Kelly says:

    @Jeffro: Alexandra Petri is a treasure. That column is her best ever which is what I think just about every new column she publishes.

  129. 129
    TenguPhule says:

    @Kay:

    It just makes sense to have the lean-to builder trade work with the fisherwoman – it’s efficient- and they won’t be lonely and miserable.

    The problem with that is efficiency is safe and boring.

    Which makes for horrible reality tv.

    I really miss safe and boring.

  130. 130
    Elizabelle says:

    Back to Charlie Rose: another Page Six item about him, from April 12: Charlie Rose living a ‘lonely’ life after career collapse

    Accused sexual harasser Charlie Rose is living a “lonely” life of exile at his $6 million Long Island waterfront mansion, friends and locals tell The Hollywood Reporter.

    The ousted newsman — who was kicked off TV last year after eight women accused him of groping, walking around naked and making lurid phone calls — has retreated to property in the village of Bellport, where he spends his days reading newspapers, playing tennis and dining alone at local eateries, according to the report.

    … “He’s a broken, powerful, old man surrounded by people who love him, but the truth is, he is desperately lonely,” [according to] one former colleague …

    … It’s unclear whether the 76-year-old has worked self-reflection into this schedule — at least one pal says he hasn’t.

    “I don’t think he thinks he’s done anything wrong,” a friend told THR. “He’s in complete denial; he thinks he will be back on television.”

    But another says he has.

    “My sense is that Charlie has put [book writing and planning his return to TV] aside for now,” they said. “I think he is focusing on trying to understand, [both] events and other people’s perception of them.”

    At least one of his accusers (!) wishes he was doing more than just moping around.

    “I do believe that someone as brilliant as Charlie could have sought help and documented the process,” says former assistant Kyle Godfrey-Ryan.

    “He could have dived into research about the male ego and tried to get to the root of why this pattern of abuse is so common with positions of power. He could have used this moment to change the state of play in journalism.”

    Hmmm.

  131. 131
    Gin & Tonic says:

    @StringOnAStick:

    And as far as the pendant thing goes

    I think I get double pedant points for pointing out that the word is “pedant” and not “pendant.”

  132. 132
    efgoldman says:

    @JustRuss:

    I’d maybe be OK with this if they broadcast from Cosby’s prison cell.

    They could send OJ as a special guest interviewer

  133. 133
    Gin & Tonic says:

    @Elizabelle:

    He could have used this moment

    He could have used this moment to shut the fuck up and go away.

  134. 134
    danielx says:

    @TenguPhule:

    I really miss safe and boring.

    Me too, times infinity. No wonder the media couldn’t warm up to No-drama Obama; he didn’t provide them daily scandal fodder.

  135. 135
    danielx says:

    @Elizabelle:

    “He could have dived into research about the male ego and tried to get to the root of why this pattern of abuse is so common with positions of power. He could have used this moment to change the state of play in journalism.”

    Why? It’s not all that complicated: because they think they can

    Plus male scumbags seem predominate positions of power. There’s not a 100% correlation; I’m sure there are CEOs and media types who are very decent people. It’s just that those who are grade A shitheads seem to get all the attention.

  136. 136
    different-church-lady says:

    It could be that Charlie Rose is just nuts.

  137. 137
    Amir Khalid says:

    The pun works perfectly auf Deutsch, if you take out just one letter: neunundneunzig Lustballons

    Some poor sap at the network would have to sell the advertising time for a TV talk show with a host recently exposed as a sexual predator interviewing other recently-exposed sexual predators. I would not want to be that ad salesperson.

  138. 138

    @danielx:

    Why? It’s not all that complicated: because they think they can

    People with power use that power to get what they want. Most people want sex. Assholes are willing to not merely use power, but abuse power to get what they want, and the more power someone has, the less reason they have to hide the asshole they were already. It’s not even a male thing. Women are well represented in committing sexual abuse, harassment, and rape in those situations where they have the power – but in our society, systematically men overwhelmingly are in those power positions. Particularly, the positions where not only do they have power over someone, they have a system around them they know will cover for them.

  139. 139
    JR says:

    This would work best in a talk show format.

    Maybe they could have Roman Polanski and Bill Cosby call in.

  140. 140
    Jeffro says:

    @RSA:

    I thought Petri was making up her quotes. She was not. OMG.

    OMG indeed.

    As far back as I can recall, whenever she quotes someone, she’s dead-on accurate…and then uses it to horrifying/hilarious effect. No need to twist anything. She really owns the “this is completely fucked up and here, let me help you really internalize that shit” niche.

    Plus puns!

  141. 141
    Jeffro says:

    @Kelly: I loved the one today but she had one a month ago…trying to remember which…that was her best of all time. I’ll look it up and be back in a minute…

  142. 142
    Jeffro says:

    @Jeffro: I take it back, it was just two weeks ago: Paul Ryan Can’t Possibly Have Made A Deal With the Devil

    Paul Ryan did not make a deal with the devil. That much is obvious.

    His piano-playing has not improved. He has not become any wiser. He has not been able to travel widely and see the great sights of the present and past. Helen of Troy has not made him immortal with a kiss, and he has not gotten to go to a single witches’ sabbath (although he has heard continually about witch hunts).

    He has not become able to fly. (Scott Pruitt has, and Tom Price has, often, and at great expense.) There is no picture of him in a closet that ages and becomes hideous while he himself remains boyish. The picture of him that has become more and more embarrassing to look at is the one that appears on TV, every day, where everyone can see it.

    His golf game has not improved (nor has he really gotten the opportunity to practice, as the president has). He cannot become flame and ride a motorcycle. He has not managed to bring anyone back from the dead, or even gotten to eat half a pomegranate. The Senators, his favorite team, have not been victorious. (Well, they have, but seldom, and by very narrow margins, and not on every issue that he hoped, and usually Mitch McConnell got the credit.)

    He can walk on land now, but he is pretty sure he could do that before.

    Some mornings he looks in the mirror and wonders whether it was worth it, just to increase the deficit.

    Sometimes — he is almost too afraid to voice the thought aloud — he thinks that increasing the deficit was not always his cherished wish. That it was something different. Something to do with Jack Kemp, maybe.

    (He got to see Jack Kemp, once, in a dream, but Jack just looked disappointed and turned away.)

    Undermining the institutions of this democracy? Was that the wish? He does not think that was the wish. If he was doing this to protect the institutions, then what were all these hearings casting vague suspicion on the FBI?

    He tries to remember.

    Tax cuts were a wish, and entitlement reform, and there must have been a third thing. To see Greg Gianforte seated in the House after he body-slammed a reporter? No.

    To stand behind a president who spouted racism about “shithole countries” and equated the white nationalists at Charlottesville with those who protested them? To allow President Trump to fill his White House with family members and conflicts of interest leagues deep and fathoms wide? To support a man who never released his tax returns?

    At least Ryan managed to preserve the integrity of his beloved Republican Party, a party of ideas, not of people who are banned from malls and want to do unspeakable things to schoolchildren in the name of the Second Amendment. He has lost himself, maybe, but he has protected his party’s image as a group of people who were united by something more than greed or identity. And at least the majority has been preserved.

    Why does he hear laughter? Is none of this true? Has there been some horrible mistake?

    Trumpov is a lesser demon; Ryan truly did sell his soul. Petri nails it so painfully right you can hear the hammer.

  143. 143
    Shana says:

    @Timurid: Correction: white men.

  144. 144
    J R in WV says:

    @ruemara:

    “…but, you can have them destroy your DNA records.”

    Really? You believe them…? I think Ancestry is the Mormons, they’ll be using your swab to baptize all your great-greats into their church! Well, maybe.

  145. 145
    Shana says:

    @Citizen Alan: PBS has a geneology show, forget the name at the moment, and they had both Larry David and Bernie Sanders on an episode. One of the things they do is test the participants’ DNA, and then for kicks run it against all the other folks who’ve been on the show to see if there’s a match. Turns out Bernie and Larry are distantly related.

  146. 146
    TenguPhule says:

    @Jeffro: He fired the House Chaplain today.

  147. 147
    evodevo says:

    @Kathleen: I hate to tell you, but that is SOP in evangelical churches … “forgive” the perp and hug him, usually in front of the congregation. Talk about mental abuse …

  148. 148
    Gvg says:

    If the point of the DNA search sites is to find relatives, it can only work if people give consent to other people finding them. If you want unknown cousin Molly to find you, you say to company, “ok tell anyone who matches what my name is and how to get in touch”
    I doubt the killer sent his in. Police got someone who had maybe 24% and using old fashioned footwork listed all relatives especially the ones with the right % of shared ancestry. Then they get another match of let us guess 8%…repeat steps and look for overlap.
    The things society has to address are making sure the evidence isn’t contaminated like the woman in the cotton swab factory and two, the hard part is that the laws are as fair as possible so DA’s and cops can’t be missed by authoritarians….that’s the really hard part. DNA searches are going to happen and compare to eyewitness reports, are a lot more accurate.

  149. 149
    Sister Rail Gun of Warm Humanitarianism says:

    @lamh36:

    folks who used one of thise DNA sites…how do you feel about this

    Do people think that the police got hold of the DNA data for all the users of the various sites?

    No.

    What they undoubtedly did was run their own analysis via the same chip used by the testing companies, format it properly, then upload that file to the sites that accept test results from other companies. They then took the list of cousins that the site produced and did a straightforward genealogical analysis of the available family trees to narrow down a list of suspects. And then they obtained samples from their suspect and did a direct comparison to the original sample.

    There’s a group of volunteers who use this method to ID unknown soldiers and John and Jane Does.

    @Baud:

    I wonder how many families have broken up due to DNA testing.

    I’ve never seen numbers on that, just anecdotes. Lots have been reunited, of course.

  150. 150
    Sister Rail Gun of Warm Humanitarianism says:

    @Gvg: 24% would be a half sibling or a nibling. They wouldn’t have to do much footwork for that one.

  151. 151
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Shana:

    That’s “Finding Your Roots,” which is hosted by Henry Louis Gates Jr. It’s really a terrific show. The episode with John Legend and Wanda Sykes is really fascinating because it delves into the history of free Black people in the US and how hard it sometimes was for them to maintain that status (think 12 Years A Slave, which was a true story).

  152. 152
    LanceThruster says:

    A piece by someone who sees what is not being talked about.

    “What’s most terrifying though, is not that Bill Cosby refused to speak honestly about his investment in sexual violence; it’s that if Bill Cosby, or Bill Clinton, or Bill O’Reilly ever really talked honestly about their relationships to sexual violence, deception and abuse, their talks would matter so much more to most men and boys than the talks, and experiences of Annie Glover, and the millions of women and girls who have told us in so many different ways we are a maniacally violent country filled with violent men and boys clinging to an innocence that never existed, an abusive ignorance that would rather talk about privilege than power, and a woeful intransigence that makes reckoning with our abuses absolutely impossible.”

  153. 153
    Amir Khalid says:

    @TenguPhule:
    It’s strongly hinted in the NBC News story I looked up (but not admitted by Ryan) that the sacking offence could only be Fr. Conroy’s criticism of the Republican tax-cut legislation in prayers he said. The criticism struck me as within bounds, being based on compassion and not partisanship. If that was indeed Conroy’s offence, it tells us Ryan is a petty and vicious little man. Which is hardly news.

  154. 154
    Mnemosyne says:

    @LanceThruster:

    Wait, you think that article was about Bill Clinton and how he needs to be personally accountable?

    Jesus, you’re dumb.

  155. 155
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @LanceThruster: Show us on the doll where a Clinton touched you.

  156. 156
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    He linked to an entire essay about how individual men need to look at their own actions and see how they have been perpetuating our system of sexual violence by not talking openly about it and immediately found that thought so threatening that he decided it was really about Bill Clinton’s need to speak up publicly.

    The author of that essay demanded personal responsibility and reflection from every person, male or female, who reads it, and Lance immediately said, Hey, look at that guy over there — he’s the one whose fault it is, not me!

  157. 157
    Jay says:

    @ruemara:

    Booman covered it off:

    http://www.boomantribune.com/s.....12454/2855

    “In other words, the DCCC was doing their job of trying to build a team of candidates that can win a majority. They can defend most of what they’ve done here, but they should not have lied about it. If they make a decision to back a candidate in a primary, they should announce their decision. And if they have some reason why they’re afraid to announce it, then they should stay neutral.”

  158. 158
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @LanceThruster:People who had extramarital affairs?

  159. 159
    Mnemosyne says:

    @LanceThruster:

    I’m wondering today, though, if making Bill Cosby the face, and really the mascot, of rape and sexual violence in this nation, without reckoning with our own experiences with sexual violence, abuse and gendered deception, makes sexual violence, and other forms of emotional abuse more pervasive.

    Two paragraphs above this, the writer discusses how he himself was sexually abused by people he trusted (“box wine” ring any bells?) but was too ashamed and uncomfortable to reveal it to the woman who had just revealed her own abuse to him.

    I’m condescending to you because you allegedly read that heart-rending essay about men’s own complicity in our society’s sexual violence and the only thing that stood out to you was Bill Clinton’s name. You missed the writer’s entire. fucking. point.

  160. 160
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Mnemosyne: The funny thing is the he is calling you condescending. You may be many things, but not that. Arrogant and condescending is my thing, damn it.

  161. 161
    LanceThruster says:

    @Jay:

    If the party has to lie about knowing best, then maybe they don’t. Didn’t they just recently promise more transparency? I’d bet that they’d overlook a lot of positions they might not fully agree with as long ad the candidate ranked high on fundraising.

    The kingmaking aspect reminds me of this.

  162. 162
    LanceThruster says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    What stood out in relation to the post itself was the possible value in *how* it was talked about. I thought his use of Bill x3 was wonderfully inventive and appropriate.

  163. 163
    Mnemosyne says:

    @LanceThruster:

    You saw Bill Clinton’s name in the essay and immediately thought, How can I make this all the Democrats’ fault?

    You read an essay about a man’s deep personal pain and reflection on how his own actions or inactions may have contributed to the pain of others, and your immediate thought was to try and weaponize it against your political enemies.

    You do not exist outside of your hatred for the Clintons. You cannot comprehend any societal problem that is not their fault, or at least the fault of the Democratic Party.

    That’s not condescension. That’s just a fact.

  164. 164
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    I can be condescending if I try, but I’m not as good at it. 😉 Usually, trolls call me “condescending” when they realize that they’re factually wrong and need to deflect.

  165. 165
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Mnemosyne: It is really my skill set. Stories if ever a meet up.

  166. 166
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    There are tales I can tell verbally about the GEC that can’t be put in written form. The Hollywood Reporter’s most recent article about our leadership kerfuffle gets it more right than their initial reporting.

  167. 167
    LanceThruster says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    One of the points stressed in here is the importance of women being believed, particularly in multiple allegations. Even Monica Lewinsky, though consensual, was certainly an example of misconduct in the workplace predicated on unequal levels of power and status. Hillary saved some of her choicest barbs in dismissing Ms. Lewinsky.

    Either she knew but chose to lie about it to provide cover, or Bill Clinton’s ability to deceive even those closest to him is textbook sociopathy. My guess is political expediency as I do not consider Hillary Clinton a stupid woman.

  168. 168
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @LanceThruster: Okay, you are daft. I suspected that, but I did wonder.

  169. 169
    Mnemosyne says:

    Also, too, I think that Mr. Layman’s essay was partially inspired by author Junot Diaz’s recent revelation that he was sexually abused as a child and how his unwillingness to deal with that pain led him to emotionally abuse the women who tried to love him.

    It’s a tough read, but cathartic and hopeful to see a man willing to examine and criticize his own bad actions.

  170. 170
    LanceThruster says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    The only deflection is by those who chose not to address the point made.

    Shorter BJ regulars might as well be, “How dare you bring up Bill and Hillary on this subject as they have absolutely nothing to do with the dynamic of sexual predation and enabling!”

    Always go with the shorter.

  171. 171
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    I’m not saying that everything is Hillary Clinton’s fault, but, really, everything is her fault! 🙄

    Though I kind of love it when trolls do exactly what I said they were going to do. To the letter, even.

  172. 172
    Lyrebird says:

    @ruemara: Dunno if you’re still reading this thread, but that song was excellent!

  173. 173
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @LanceThruster: Seriously, show us on the doll where a Clinton touched you.

  174. 174
    Mnemosyne says:

    @LanceThruster:

    The only deflection is by those who chose not to address the point made.

    The point being made in the passage you quoted is that men refuse to listen to women when they talk about their experiences of sexual abuse. He’s not recommending that Bill Clinton give us all a public mea culpa — he’s decrying the fact that our culture’s misogyny values the voices of male abusers above those of female victims.

    But, again, your monomania against the Clintons led you to completely misinterpret something you read once you saw one of their names appear.

  175. 175
    LanceThruster says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    Gave me a lingering case of Pied Piper.

  176. 176
    Sab says:

    @Major Major Major Major: opiegene was just being mean girl to new commenter

Comments are closed.