abba.  a super group of the 70s and 80s.  i really loved them.  everything that they did.  some people didn't like them, they were a pop group.  let me grab from wikipedia:

ABBA (/ˈæbə/ ABSwedish: [ˈâbːa]) are a Swedish pop group formed in Stockholm in 1972 by Agnetha FältskogBjörn UlvaeusBenny Andersson, and Anni-Frid Lyngstad. The group's name is an acronym of the first letters of their first names arranged in a chiastic pattern. Widely considered one of the greatest musical groups of all time,[2] they became one of the most commercially successful acts in the history of popular music, topping the charts worldwide from 1974 to 1983. They have achieved 48 hit singles.

In 1974, ABBA were Sweden's first winner of the Eurovision Song Contest with the song "Waterloo", which in 2005 was chosen as the best song in the competition's history as part of the 50th anniversary celebration of the contest.[3] During the band's main active years, it consisted of two married couples: Fältskog and Ulvaeus, and Lyngstad and Andersson. With the increase of their popularity, their personal lives suffered, which eventually resulted in the collapse of both marriages. The relationship changes were reflected in the group's music, with latter compositions featuring darker and more introspective lyrics.[4] After ABBA separated in 1982, Andersson and Ulvaeus continued their success writing music for multiple audiences including stage, musicals and movies,[5][6] while Fältskog and Lyngstad pursued solo careers.[7][8]

Ten years after the group broke up, a compilation, ABBA Gold, was released, becoming a worldwide best-seller. In 1999, ABBA's music was adapted into Mamma Mia!, a successful musical that toured worldwide. A film of the same name, released in 2008, became the highest-grossing film in the United Kingdom that year. A sequel, Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again, was released in 2018.

In 2016, the group reunited and started working on a digital avatar concert tour.[9] Newly recorded songs were announced in 2018.[10] Voyage, their first new album in 40 years, is scheduled for release in 2021.[11] A concert residency featuring ABBA as virtual avatars – dubbed 'ABBAtars' – will take place in London from May to October 2022.[12]

ABBA is one of the best-selling music artists of all time, with record sales estimated to be between 150 million to 385 million sold worldwide[13][14] and the group was ranked 3rd best-selling singles artists in the United Kingdom with a total of 11.3 million singles sold by 3 November 2012.[15] ABBA was the first group from a non-English-speaking country to achieve consistent success in the charts of English-speaking countries, including the United StatesUnited KingdomRepublic of IrelandCanadaAustraliaNew Zealand and South Africa.[16] They are the best-selling Swedish band of all time[17] and one of the best-selling bands originating in continental Europe. ABBA had eight consecutive number-one albums in the UK. The group also enjoyed significant success in Latin America and recorded a collection of their hit songs in Spanish. The group was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 2010.[18] In 2015, their song "Dancing Queen" was inducted into the Recording Academy's Grammy Hall of Fame.[19]

their music was the basis for the play 'mama mia.'  it was also the basis for 2 'mama mia' movies (i recommend the 2nd).  and, of course, cher was in the 2nd one and recorded a whole album of abba songs.

so abba's released some new music.  and it's supposed to be bombing according to this article:

The public seems less than interested, especially in ABBA’s new music. As with all legacy acts from the 70s, 80s, and even 90s, the fans just want to hear the hits. Their brains aren’t wired to accept new music.

And so ABBA has released three failed singles since September 2nd. All duds, not only sales wise, but on the radio, and critically. They are bad records. And the public has responded in kind.

Here are the sales figures according to Buzz Angle/Alpha Data:

Just a Notion – 3,000 copies total mostly streaming, only 574 paid downloads
Don’t Shut me Down — 37,000 copies, 5,800 downloads
I Still Have Faith in You — 25,000 copies, 4,300 downloads

Those numbers don’t augur well for “Voyage,” even though the album is currently listed at number 7 on Amazon based on advance sales. But “Voyage” could have one or two big days based on those sales, and then peter out quickly if there aren’t tracks getting attention. So far radio has ignored the new ABBA songs, and with good reason. They are not nearly as charismatic as ABBA’s fabled hits which have been featured in two movie musicals, one Broadway musical, a covers album by Cher, and so on.

i love abba and that really made me sad.  i called c.i. to ask what happened? 

c.i.: what happened?  they're having success.  the album is selling with advanced sales - even that slam piece can't pretend otherwise.  the sales of singles?  abba's not going to get on pop radio today.  they're not young enough, they're not new, etc etc.  but the songs are hits.  ignore the b.s. in that article.  go to youtube and look at the official video posted on the abba account and you will see, i'm sure, that those videos have streamed millions and millions.  they're new songs.  their audience isn't paying for singles.  they'll buy the album, they'll go to youtube and stream the song.  they're not bombing.  they have a huge base and there are enough people interested that this is already a hit project.

okay.  i hope so. 

i love the new song 'don't shut me down.'

listening to c.i., i checked and the official video at abba's youtube account:

Sep 2, 2021

14 million streams?  no, that's not a bomb.

then there's 'i still have faith in you.'

and the official video has how many streams?

Sep 2, 2021

'just a notion.'

this 1 was released a week ago and here's the streaming numbers:

Oct 21, 2021

'just a notion' sounds to me like michelle phillips' 'the aching kind' from her only solo album (michelle was mama michelle of the mamas & the papas).

and those news songs?  the 1st 2 songs have been big hits in 9 countries - meaning top tens and number 1s.  so stop pretending like abba's bombing.

let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

 Friday, October 29, 2021.  As the myth-based coverage of Moqtada continues from US 'press' outlets, we offer some reality.

Heaven help us, the world deserves better.

You can't follow what passes for commentary without thinking "The world deserves better."  I'm reminded of this with the garbage FOREIGN POLICY has published -- is that redundant?  FP just publishes garbage and has been since around the time of Susan Glasser's brief tenure at the head of the magazine.  It's garbage.  

So they want to weigh in on Iraq and they can't find anyone obviously.  So they go with . . . Anchal Vohra.  Scratching your head?  A lot of us are.  Those of us who know her work certainly are.  But, reality, most people are scratching their heads over "Who?" They'd be right to.

But Anchal's problem for those of us who know her work is she doesn't cover Iraq.  She's a paid journalist.  In three years, she has filed two reports on Iraq -- don't count her b.s. "Syria and Iraq" that is never about Iraq, whether it's her or anyone else, they write about Syria and toss in a tidbit about Iraq.  Anchal does the same with her "Lebanaon and Iraq" coverage.  She's in Beirut and she largely covers Israel. 

She's not an expert on Iraq and it shows.  Over and over.  

And I get it, most people have pulled their staff from Iraq.  You need someone to write a column, what are you going to do? 

Well, I don't know, maybe get an Iraqi journalist in Iraq to write it?  How about that?

It beats bringing on Jane Arraf -- which MSNBC did recently and Ava and I were kind and avoided weighing in on that nonsense.  Jane has no opinion worth sharing.

She's at THE NEW YORK TIMES now.  But you may know her from THE CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, NPR, ALJAZEERA or, most infamously CNN.

She's been in Iraq forever.  Including under CNN. 

If you're thinking, wait, wait, I don't know that name -- you're right.

Because she doesn't break news.



She learned that at CNN.  

As Eason Jordan revealed in April of 2003 ("The News We Kept To Ourselves," NEW YORK TIMES), CNN didn't report from Iraq.  They covered what the Iraqi government (run by Saddam Hussein) wanted covered.  They avoided anything embarrassing (such as reality) because it might get them kicked out of the country.

That's why you don't know Jane Arraf.  She's 'covered' Iraq since the 90s.  And she never saw anything.  


Abu Ghraib?  Nope.  Innocent civilians being killed?  No.

I should be fair.  She did briefly see the deaths of civilians.  Briefly.  When she was new on Twitter.  But those deaths never made it into her print or radio coverage.  Even when she was an eye witness.

Because Jane was trained under "The News We Kept To Ourselves."  

Someone who is now on her fourth decade covering Iraq and she's never had a scoop, never had a memorable piece of journalism.  

That is, by the way, how she keeps getting hired.  They hire her, all these outlets, knowing that she'll churn out boring copy that never informs so it never alienates.  She takes up space and let's them check off 'covered' on their list.

Back to Anchal.  At FOREIGN POLICY, she pens the non-thought piece (a musing? fan fiction?) entitled "Muqtada al-Sadr is the United States' best hope in Iraq."

Iraq is a land of orphans and widows.  The war continues and will hit the 19th anniversary mark next March.  The media age in Iraq is 21-years-old.    By way of contrast, in the US, the median age is 38.1-years-old.  Why the stark difference?  Because the war killed over a million people.  Because it turned the country into a land of orphans and widows.

And yet Anchal's writing about the Iraq election from the stand point of . . . the US?

Never accuse most journalists of having a sense of purpose -- the vast majority don't even provide context today.  

FOREIGN POLICY pretends it informs readers -- but informing readers requires telling them what's happening, not shaping articles to suit policy -- that's called propaganda at worst and press releases at best.  Thanks, Anchal, for making it clear that there is no informing from FP, just indoctrination.  

Let's move over to Brooking to quote from a new piece by Ranj Alaaldin:

Muqtada al-Sadr’s victory is an example of strategic acumen within a movement that continues its transition from insurgency to government, propelled by a yearning for respite and leadership, and by rampant destitution within Iraqi society. Almost 32% of Iraq’s population could soon be impoverished. But it is precisely this despair that has resulted in the emergence of a protest movement that considers Sadr and his militia to be part of the problem, and complicit in the bloodshed that has engulfed the country, including violence against protesters. In its electoral debut, the bloc representing the protesters, Imtidad, secured 10 seats out of 329, a remarkable feat for a movement that is subjected to systemic assassinations and contested the elections amid unprecedented voter apathy.

In that one paragraph, Rani presents more reality than Anchal does in her entire essay.

The clear choice in Iraq was Moqtada, Anchal lies.  No, dear, with at least 52% of voters sitting out the election, the clear choice was something other than what is being offered.  

As for the claim that Moqtada was a choice over the militias, what world do you live in?

Firsly, we've got the reality that the militias were disenfranchised since most could not vote (the bulk of the militia members were excluded from early voting on October 7th by a 'ruling' from the electoral commission and the bulk of the militias were deployed on October 10th to provide security -- October 10th being the election day).  That claim keeps getting made and it's not accurate.  

I loathe the militias and, had this been a fair election and the turnout the same, I'd be the first to trumpet this as reality.  But it's not reality.  And even to me, someone who loathes the militias, it's obvious that the militias were disenfranchised (and this may have been done on behalf of the US government, two US State Dept friends turn strangely coy on the topic while a third tells me I'm on the right track).

Secondly, Moqtada has his goon squad.  He is not apart from the militias.  He's a bit of an egomaniac who can't get along with others.  What>  You thought he was just Iraq's version of Richard Simmons in a large caftan?

Thirdly, huh?

Moqtada wasn't on the ballot.  NOr is it his political party that won all the seats that they apparently did -- final results are still not in.  

Iraq election body soon to announce final results after recount

Are we forgetting that the same empty-minded press covered Moqtada not participating in the election?  

It wasn't news.  We noted here that a member of his political party e-mailed to correct that coverage.  The members were still running whether Moqtada was boycotting the election or not.  They had already filed their paperwork.  

Moqtada wasn't a candidate.  He's never been.  When he said he was boycotting, that was not pulling his party or members of the alliance he's strung together.  That was he wasn't going to vote and was calling on others not to.  And then the US government used our tax dollars to buy him off in August and Moqtada came out in favor of the elections.

That's not the first time that Moqtada's received a gift from the US.

His supposed anti-American position is not as strong as it once was.  It's hard to bite the hand that feeds you.

Anchal gushes -- did she mistake FOREIGN POLICY for TEEN BEAT? next up, "Moqtada Shares the 10 hottest things about men!" -- that only Moqtada can bring Iraq "the sort of change the country needs."

Strange, he's not at one with the protesters.  No, he declared war on The October Revolution.  After this movement started in the fall o 2019, Moqtada leapt onto the bandwagon once he saw how popular it was.  But Moqtada is always about Moqtada.  And the protesters -- Shi'ites, just like Moqtada is -- weren't going to take orders from any political elite.  So, within four months, Moqtada was publicly attacking them (and his goons were attacking them with more than words).  Then he saw the backlash and tried to hop back on board then hopped back off.  And then? He got permanently shoved aside.


Motada attacked the girls and women participating.  And he stated that they should not be allowed to protest with me.

See, Moqtada's all about the men.  Moqtada's only happy when he's around men.  Make of that what you will (and many do) or just le that closet door remain closed, it's your choice. (Or put Moronic Mars on the case of Knock Down That Closet Door, Mary.)

The October Revolution wasn't having it.

And they mocked him.  They didn't just call him out.  They mocked him.  And Iraqi Shi'ites saw this and it just made the movement even more popular.  

Moqtada can't make the changes necessary when he opposes them.

That's for starters.  Second, he's not going to be prime minister.  

He may -- or may not -- be a 'kingmaker' but that won't put him in the seat of power.

And the kingmaker . . .

I don't feel like redoing it, let's just grab two Saturdays ago and re-post:


If you need to reach is 163, then 73 isn't really that close

Coming on two weeks after the election, Iraq still struggles and still has no prime minister or even a prime minister-designate.  Yet we are all supposed to pretend.  Which is how we get dreck like Thomas O'Falk (ALJAZEERA) report:

Muqtada al-Sadr remains one of Iraq’s most influential political figures and plays a pivotal role when it comes to the country’s future. He is currently considered the kingmaker, but it remains unclear if he can form a government with stability.

In the latest elections, al-Sadr’s party obtained 70 of a total of 329 parliamentary seats – a significant increase compared with the result of 2018, when his movement won 54 seats.

Despite this election result, al-Sadr did not run as a candidate for Iraq’s prime ministership.

The reason is relatively simple and founded in al-Sadr’s political strategy, Ruba Ali Al-Hassani, postdoctoral researcher at Lancaster University & Project SEPAD, told Al Jazeera.

Moqtada is a kingmaker?

He may become one.  At present?  He's not.  He's part of a stalled system.  And while Moqtada dithers and is unable to pull together an alliance, you better believe Nouri al-Maliki is working on putting together an alliance.  Or did we all forget 2010?

Nouri's State of Law bloc came in second to Moqtada's bloc.  Do we really think what happened in 2010 can't happen again?  Or are we just ignorant of recent history?  Or maybe we just discount Nouri's drive?  If it's the latter, we're wrong to do so.

It's amazing how little attention is being given to Nouri.  AL-MONITOR is one of the few outlets to emphasize the success Nouri had in this election:

Political parties affiliated with Iraqi militias faced significant defeat, while their ally Nouri al-Maliki earned a remarkable victory al-monitor.com/originals/2021

At the US government funded Carnegie Endowment for Peace, Harith Hasan writes:

On the one hand, mainstream parties such as those of the Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, former prime minister Nouri al-Maliki, the speaker of parliament Mohammed al-Halbousi, and the former president of the Kurdistan Region Massoud Barzani, appeared to be the main winners. On the other hand, there was more room for independents and newcomers to win a greater number of seats in the latest elections than during any of the previous elections, and they actually would have won more had the turnout been higher.

I believe that last sentence should be ''they actually MIGHT have won more had the turnout been higher."  Or has Carnegie dumped analysis for psychic readings?  Is this Carnegie Endowment or Carnac The Magnificent's Endowment For Peace?

More problems, Harith writes:

Election results have shown a considerable shift in the balance of power in favor of two competitors—Sadr and Maliki. If anything, Sadr’s gains—projected to be 72–75 seats—reflect his having an organized party. It is not that Sadr’s base has expanded significantly; the opposite may be true given that the total votes he received in this election appear to be less than what he received in the previous one. But the Sadrist movement has turned itself into an effective electoral machine, skillfully taking advantage of the new electoral system and fully using its voting power. The Sadrists were also helped by the low turnout, well-managed coordination between different levels of their organization, and the clarity of their political identity.

No, Moqtada does not have "an organized party."  Only one political party got more than 30 seats and that was the KDP (Massoud Barzani is the leader of that political party which is based in the Kurdistan).  

Hasan writes:

The other good performer among Shia voters was Maliki, who is projected to win 35–37 seats, after winning 25 in the last election. While there is a large gap between him and Sadr in terms of seats, the fact that he outperformed Fateh, an alliance of Iran-allied groups and paramilitaries that won 48 seats in the previous election, surprised many observers. Fateh is projected to win about 20 seats this time, and it appears that Maliki picked up most of those the alliance lost. Indeed, the power gained by Fateh and allied paramilitaries after 2014 was in part the outcome of the fragmentation of the coalition Maliki had formed when he was a prime minister.

Maliki’s fortunes have now been revived because he fielded strong candidates and appealed to Shia voters who associate him with a strong Shia-leaning state rather than one dominated by militias. The former prime minister also attracted votes from social categories that benefited from his government’s lavish spending on employment and patronage when oil prices were at their highest.

The first reaction to Sadr’s large win was the decision of the losers, led by Iran-allied groups, to rally around Maliki. But this time it is the former prime minister who is in the driver’s seat. Simultaneously, Fateh rejected the election results due to suspected voting irregularities, and allied armed groups threatened to intervene. The escalation in their rhetoric could quickly deteriorate into street clashes or armed conflict with Sadr’s supporters. More likely, this escalation, perhaps accompanied by limited confrontations, is intended to force Sadr to accept a power-sharing agreement with an alliance that includes his Shia rivals. Ultimately, among the main aims of Fateh-linked groups is to ensure the continuation of the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), an umbrella of paramilitary groups led by Iran-linked militias, the continuation, also, of the pro-Iran groups’ influence over key leadership positions within the PMF, and limited governmental oversight over the PMF.

Moqtada does not have enough seats by himself currently to be declared prime minister-designate.  Some of what passes for 'reporting' in western outlets is not reporting and it is not factual.

As for Nouri's 'new' 'fortunes' and the surprise so many have over them?  Nouri's a thug and we've long noted that here.  Didn't stop us from noting last spring that his image was on the rise and that he would likely do very well in these elections.  You're only surprised and see this as a new development if you're surprised and weren't paying attention.  Mustafa has been a disaster for the Iraqi people.  This, in turn, has made a lot more look fondly on Nouri than had previously.

That is not an endorsement from me for Nouri al-Maliki.  A) I don't vote in Iraq.  B) I don't care for Nouri al-Maliki.  

However, noting that support was again building for Nouri was noting what was happening -- not what I wanted to happen, not what predicted would happen but what was actually happening.

It's a shame that so many outlets in the west are surprised by Nouri's victories.  It's a shame because it underscores how useless and uninformed so much of their work in 2021 has been when it comes to Iraq.

This lavish praise for Moqtada -- like the earlier lavish praise for Mustafa -- is unwarranted and not at all factual.

73 seats?


That might mean something if you needed 74 seats in Parliament to be declared the prime minister-designate.  

But, missing from all the hagiographic pieces the western media's filing on Moqtada, the reality is that you need 163 seats.

73 is a long way from 163.

And two weeks on yet Moqtada still appears to struggle forming deals, partnerships and alliances.  They missed reality ahead of the election and now, after the election, the same outlets still struggle to comprehend reality.  Moqtada may indeed end up pulling off the hat trick.  However, at his present, not only has he not done so, he's shown no indication that he has the ability to do so.


End of repost.

Get it?

73 is not 163 and Moqtada is having a very difficult time assembling support.  

The militias -- the ones furious with Moqtada -- have met with Nouri al-Maliki.

I said he would ty to assemble a coalition and he is.  That's what last weekend was all about for any who paid attention.  

73 is a long way away from 163 -- especially when you're as polarizing as Moqtada has been.

He may end up a kingmaker.  He may not.  But the media keeps lying that he is already one and they're not paying attention to the other things going on.  


The following sites updated:


another episode of impeachment

'impeachment' is close to winding down. the latest episode aired on 'fx' last night.


a good episode. should have been great. but it focused on hillary and edie falco cannot play hillary clinton. it's an embarrassment. she had a scene with the vernon jordans and you just cringed watching her be edie falco but being called hillary.

this has to be the worst casting of the year.

maybe they could have just handled her like they did chelsea. i have no idea who's playing chelsea. she's had no lines. she just enters a door glowering and walks off.

it's a convincing performance of any teenager around their parents. :D

but edie falco is just awful.

clive owen should be thrilled that she's cast in the role because it lets all of us avoid how awful he is and he's pretty awful as bill clinton.

mira sorvino has had some nice moments as monica's mother, by the way. i said that to c.i., that i thought the actress was doing a good job but i didn't know who it was. she told me it was mira and i was shocked. she really is giving a performance that's nothing like anything she's done before. i've admired her work in this role and assumed she was some stage actress i was unaware of.

next week, sarah paulson should be back on as linda tripp. i hope so because paulson is amazing.

i am enjoying the show but really wish that they'd gotten a different actress to play hillary.


let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

 Wednesday, October 27, 2021. We largely focus on a YOUTUBE segment.

Starting in Iraq, REUTERS reports, "Islamic State militants killed 11 people including a woman on Tuesday in an attack on a village in Diyala province, east of Iraq, the country's Joint Operations Command said in a statement."  Is it ISIS?  It may be.  ISIS has never been vanquished.  And the reasons ISIS took root in Iraq were never addressed.  If the issues continue to go unaddressed, ISIS will actually grow stronger.  AFP notes, "The attack on Al-Rashad in Diyala province left "11 dead and 13 wounded", a local security source said."  In a Tweet, Barham Salih, president of Iraq, states this was a cowardly attack   He calls for stronger borders and backing of the security forces.

He's an idiot.  That has nothing to do with the attack.  He's an idiot who needs to be out of office.

He is a member of the PUK.  Once upon a time, the PUK was one of the two dominant parties in Iraq.  Due to Jalal Talabani and his family's numerous betrayals, the PUK fell out of favor.  The KDP, the party of Massoud Barzania, is the dominant party in the Kurdistan at present.  In fact, it's the dominant political party in Iraq.  No other political party earned as many seats in Parliament as the KDP did this month.

By custom, the post of president has gone to the Kurds.  But Salih is now a member of a minority party..  The Kuridstan has many, many minority parties and there's nothing that makes the PUK 'better' than the others.  Salih does not deserve the post on political grounds.  But in addition to that, he clearly doesn't understand a damn thing.

Salih needs to go.  

Let's step back from Iraq for a moment to note Sabby Sabs.

Sabby says, "Where is Noam Chomsky?  Who is the real Noam Chomsky? [. . .] I don't know who this guy is."

Sabby, sorry, that's Noam Chomsky.  I've known him for decades and this is the real Noam.

He really gave himself away in 2008 but there were too many in the Cult of St Barack who refused to grasp reality.

He's a fake ass and he always has been.  He's got links that he never wants to talk about.  And don't blame this on his wife passing away, that was years ago.

The only "thing" that "has happened here" is that Noam is too stupid to put up the small pretense he used to.

Here's reality, his life's work is a joke.  And is useless.  He has one classic and that's MANUFACTURING CONSENT.  When did he team up with Edward S. Herman ever again?

He didn't.

You cowrite a classic, why don't you reteam?

Because Ed stayed true.  His writing that followed that publication continued to address these and other serious issues and that harmed him in term of 'brand recognition.'  There was no huge rush to interview Ed.  It wasn't, let's bring Ed on DEMOCRACY NOW!  Ed did real work and was shut out for the most part, THIRD WORLD TRAVELER and ZNET were two of the outlets that published his work.

Ed called out Samantha Power as the war monger she is.  I know because I was calling that piece of trash out as well.   It was 2007 and the Davey D's of this world, the John Nichols were turning Samantha Power into a saint.  She's trash.  She's war hungry trash.  Noam didn't call her out.  Ed did.

Noam's work has been useless.

Detached observations tossed out in this book only to be forgotten one year later.

Iraq is a failed state?  Yes, Noam it is a failed state.  But you don't declare that in a book in 2006 and then spend all these years that follow focusing on everything else.

This is the same person, Sabby.

Noam's role has always been to distract and he's been rewarded for that.

Noam lies for politicians and that's why he is interviewed and known.  Ed told the truth and that's why many reading this are wondering: Who is Edward S. Herman.

Noam takes care of Noam and always has.  

You're wasting your time expecting more from Noam.  You should be thankful that he's showing who he really is.  It's a shame it took you so long to catch on.    Where were you when, just last year, Noam was telling Palestinian activists that they could best help Palestine by . . . voting for Joe Biden.

Noam has never been about empowerment.  He's a dirty joke and now he's a dirty old joke.  And if you think this is mean, Noam knows what I think of him and he knows he needs to get honest.  I've noted that to his face.  He's lied to people for years.

He doesn't want to help people and he has no leadership skills to offer.

We need real leaders.

This is a scary time.  The pandemic continues.  The fear is being used to divide the nation.  Who we are supposed to be and who we are right now?  They're lands apart.  I have not slammed Eric Clapton for putting his money wherever he wants.  And I think, in forty years, Eric Clapton will come out a lot better than most people.  

We're letting fear control us and divide us.  

I got the vaccine.  I support the vaccine.  I do not attack people who did not get it or who question getting it.  I understand the fear and, believe me, politicians like Joe Biden understand that fear as well and use it.

What Joe's doing is outrageous and unconstitutional.  He may get away with it while he's in the White House but history will remember him as someone who provided no leadership and who divided the country and did his best to turn one group against another.

And let's be really clear, if vaccines matter -- and I believe that they do -- then other things do as well including debt relief, including stimulus checks, including a UBI.  It's funny how no American needs help according to Joe and his policies but they all need vaccinations.

The pandemic continues.  And Joe wants to scare the country and demonize a large group of Americans.  But he doesn't want to provide assistance to We The People.  Gas prices are up, food prices are up, rent is going up and Joe is failing.  Over and over and over.

It's a good thing he's able to harness fear against the American people because otherwise he would be even lower in the polls right now.

When I say some idiot on their high horse -- an Alyssa Milano -- I'm seeing someone ruled by fear.  I acknowledge fear is out there, I acknowledge that the government is using it.  But I don't let fear rule me.

I really loathe Alyssa and she's a damn liar in her book.  Especially when she pretends about Shannen.  It's cute, isn't it, how she leaves out her rage over a certain actor choosing Shannen in real life and not Alyssa who'd been coming on to him repeatedly.  It's real cute all the lies she tells.  But let's move back a moment.

She attacked Jason Aldean's family.  Children are supposed to be off limits.  But Alyssa put them on blast.  I loathe Alyssa but I've never put her children on blast.  She's allowed her fear and hatred to make her into the trash she is.  She was never a good person to begin with.  (They loathed her on MELROSE. And for good reason.)  

I am listening to Sabby while on the stepper.  We posted it last night, I don't stream everything that goes up here.  We need to note a few things.

Sabby's glorification of Eminem is hilarious and a misreading of the dominant culture.  Eminem was rewarded for homophboia.  And "I hear you" is not what a performance with Elton John is.  A performance with Elton is an attempt to get attention and press.  You don't know what you're talking about Sabby.  Eminem was a White-fueled phenomenon.  And his homophobia was rank and disgusting.  It was called out in real time but not by many.  And he didn't suffer despite your claims otherwise.  Like Guns and Roses, Eminem's homophobia made him only more "bro" and gave him "cred."

Dave Chapelle?  I like Dave and I know Dave.  He has a good heart.  He's also said some things that are offensive.  He can do that.  And people can respond to that.  That's what's going on.

And he hasn't been 'cancelled' despite what he says.  I don't care about his 'documentary' or whatever it is.  He made a lot of people upset.  Film festivals are trying to come back.  I do not blame anyone from walking away from his film.  It's a sad industry right now.  I think film festivals would be better off exhibiting the film.  I think they'd be surprised by how many would check Dave's film out.  

No, Sabby, Dave's Comedy Central show was not the most popular show -- or one of them -- when it was aired.  I really wish you would educate yourself or just close your mouth.  There are measurements -- we do know how many people watched on a broadcast network.  If we can't do facts, we can't be part of an honest discussion.  You're mistaking what happened in your small circle for a universal experience.  It's not.

By all means, speak for yourself but stop adding these details where you lie because that's what it is.  Dave had a basic cable show.  That's all he had.  

I'm really angry now and I let it rip when I am so let me also be clear, Sabby, stop being Lena Dunham.

Remember, GIRLS couldn't have an African-American regular because Lena 'couldn't write' that.  That's a lot like Sabby trying to have an out by saying she doesn't know the LGBTQ experience.

That's a f**king piece of s**t.

"People get upset.  People get offended.  Maybe the response should be to educate them."  WTF?  

That's a direct quote.   Maybe educate yourself.  And maybe you should get cancelled if you can't deal in honesty.  

I have not called for Dave to be cancelled and wouldn't make that call.  I do think Dave needs to see this response and "Dave makes fun of everybody" is not a valid response -- but it is a quote from Sabby on the show.  I have stopped it.  I can't listen to her anymore on this topic.

She doesn't know what she's talking about.  

She doesn't know who Don Imus was.  He was not part of the NBA.  I just can't.  Don't talk about things you don't know about and, sadly, Sabby, that's all of entertainment.

You don't get how offensive it is.  You're part of the problem, Sabby.  That doesn't mean we're cancelling you.  It does mean if I know a video has you gabbing on about entertainment I'm probably not posting it here because you don't know a damn thing about that topic.

At one point, while insisting Em's all our friend and lamenting Andrew Dice Clay and other b.s. she wants to know "What changed?"

You know what, Sabby, if Diana Ross had been that way in the sixties, England would probably still be putting White people before the royal family in blackface.  It was insulting and it shouldn't have happened and it certainly shouldn't have happened in the late sixties.  It took Diana Ross calling it out to get it stopped.  And she got blowback for it but she changed things.  (I love Diana and she's a friend.  She's done more to foster change than most people know of.)  

I'm sorry, Sabby, is AMOS & ANDY going to get someone killed?  We moved beyond that as a society.  And we did so because it was hurtful and it was dishonest.

You say you don't know the trans experience, then just shut up.  

Ava and I were asked to write about Dave by Jim for THIRD and I refused.  I didn't want Ava's name on it because I didn't want Ava to have to deal with any backlash.  Because I'm not going to slam Dave.  He is a friend.  He is well intentioned.  Equally true "Dave" is a persona for his stage career.  And this is very complicated topic.  

But I also wasn't going to slam anyone in the transgender community or attempt to tell them don't cancel, don't do this.

This is their damn lives.  

At the end of the day, all this is for Dave is a joke.  This is the transgender community's lives.  I don't get how you can't get that Sabby or grasp how awful you sounded in the segment on Dave.  

"What changed?" she basically huffs at one point.

What changed is society evolved.  That's what we do.  We progress, we evolve.  

And you may have been okay with Eminem's homophobia but I never was nor did I ever applaud Axel Rose and his homophobia, his use of the n-word, his violence towards women . . .

I never called for him to be banned.  I never burned his CDs (I never bought his music to begin with and when David Geffen sent me that EP to try to change my mind about the band, I tossed it into the trash without listening -- I'd already seen the lyrics to "One In A Million.")

You're coming into the struggle for equality very late and you don't know a damn thing.  You need to educate yourself or avoid these kind of topics.  You clearly do not grasp the need for change and growth.  Or it's need in the past.  If you had your show in 1952, would you have been justifying school segregation?  I don't know where it ends because to me, the struggle for equality is a struggle for all of us.  I think you may be playing into the same fear Dave sports in his special -- that progress for one group harms another.  No, all boats can be lifted.

And trans people have enough to suffer through in life with people trying to intentionally be mean without you trying to be 'helpful' and saying some of the offensive things you've said.

I'm not calling for anyone to be cancelled.  That's Dave, that's the people who are protesting his special -- which is more than just the transgender community.  

Dave needs to listen to this.  He needs to hear the hurt.  He caused that.  He didn't mean to.  He thought everyone was going to enjoy it.  As a straight woman, Sabby enjoyed it and couldn't relate to how anyone could be harmed.  (Sabby, needs to take a look at herself.)  He didn't set out to harm.  He didn't set out to hurt.  

But he's a communicator and if he wants a career on stage in the public eye, he's going to have to adjust.  That's true if he did nothing political.  If he just did yada yada jokes, he'd still have to adjust and change with the times.  Look at Frank Sinatra in the 60s.  He had to update his image.  

You don't get to be the same person you were and have an audience for years and years.  It really doesn't work that way.  If you have shown everything you will ever have to offer today, then people will move away from you.  That's the reality of celebrity.

So Dave has to change period.  All entertainers do or they have no career.  

But Dave needs to listen.  And it's painful, I know and my heart goes out to him on that because I know he didn't mean to hurt.  He thought he was being outrageous and everyone was going to laugh together.

But that's not what's happening.  You've got Sabby deciding to weigh in to . . . support Dave.  She's not weighed in on it before.  And, certainly, her politics are supposed to be rooted in the people -- not top down.  But watch her go reactionary.

Dave hurt people.  Didn't mean to.  He needs to listen and he needs to reflect.  He needs to grow.  Or he needs to be off the stage.  And that's not 'cancel Dave!'  That's the life cycle of celebrity.  

The transgender community deserves support.  They are the ones wronged in this.  And don't give me that 'it's just words.'  This is their life.  That is what is at stake.  It's what always at stake, whether it's the battle for this cause, the Civil Rights Movement, the women's liberation movement (which was always about many things including the way we view rape and domestic terrorism in the home), the Civil Rights Movement.  

Dave can say whatever he wants and I'm not going to hate him for it.  I know him and I like Dave.  But this a public square that he works in and if he says something that offends, people have a right to push back.

And excuse me, Sabby, but these people pushing back, they're doing so without a platform.  NETFLIX hasn't seen fit to give voice to them.  You've yet to do a special on them.  You've yet to take up their cause.  But you're offended that Dave's film isn't getting a distributor and so you've taken to the podium for Dave's defense.

Your loyalties are misplaced and your knowledge base is woefully weak.  

For the record, I wasn't planning to call Sabby out in this snapshot.  I thought I'd just add some to Noam.  I wish I'd stop streaming after she was done with Noam.

The transgender community should not be thrown under the bus.  They are reacting to what were hurtful insults.  And if Dave can't grasp that, then he's not the Dave I know.  But I also grasp that he feels under siege and I get that as well.  But he needs to reflect on what's going on.  Not to silence himself but to learn from it.  

He can say whatever he wants.  Anyone can.  Sabby did.  And I called her out.  That's how it works in the public square.

And I'm not calling for her to be cancelled and have already noted that we will continue to post her videos (unless I know she's talking about entertainment and then I may listen first to see how off base she is -- on entertainment, she's offbase for not knowing her facts re: Eminem, Don Imus, how TV viewership ratings work, etc.).  

I didn't plan on weighing in on this.  We've posted videos from all sides regarding Dave's latest special.  I love Dave and don't believe he meant harm.  But that's not me trying to do an end run around this conversation and stop it.  This conversation needs to take place and I fully support the right of those who actually live the transgendered experience to have this conversation, to have it publicly and to be heard.  

If you're not aware of the violence -- all over the world but in the US as well -- aimed at the transgender community, then you need to educate yourself.  This is a very serious issue.  A real conversation needs to take place.  That means going beyond "I'm a fan-boy/girl for Dave so . . ."

Dave is the least of the issues in this conversation.  We need to educate ourselves and we need to listen and we need to be sure that the microphone is in front of those who are being harmed.  That should be basic and not in dispute.

The following sites updated: