F@{K MITCH MCCONNELL

 

No no no! I don't mean have sexual intercourse with him! Yuck! Gross! By that, I mean that Mr. Mitch should NOT be a senator, but rather he should be locked in a giant safe which is locked in a bigger giant safe which is itself locked in an even bigger gigantic safe which is then buried............ on an asteroid made out of the stinkiest rhinosehraus shit that's at least 10,000,000,000,000,000 light years from Earth. Then that asteroid should be sucked into the biggest and least escapable black hole the universe has ever produced. That way, this frog-joweled ersatz despot can never bother any of us ever again.

"Why should this happen?", you ask. I will get to that by the end of this blog post. Yes, it will definitely include stuff about Donald Trump, the 2020 election, and Trump's last days in office.  Sorry about that. I know we're all sick to death of see him and talking about him by now, but I need to say what I'm about to say so here it goes.

If you need to know my basic opinion of Trump, you can check out this old blog post of mine I made back in 2015 when he started campaigning.  You can also watch this old video I made in an attempt to do an impression of an "anti-sjw youtuber". 

(Drink a shot of zambuka every time you cringe).

I'm sure some people reading this might want to ask me if I think "the 2020 election was stolen from Trump due to massive fraud".  My response to that is I........................... don't care.  I think both Donald Trump and Joe Biden are bad choices to be president each in their own way.  If Trump and his "legal" team had somehow managed to flip enough electoral votes to Republican, then stupid dumb Donny

would stay on as president.  But, with the election results staying as they are, it means that stupid old creaky old Joe Biden becomes the president.  This contest was almost literally the Giant Douche/Turd Sandwich confrontation that South Park made an episode about. No matter which one of those two got in, America (and the world really) is in for 4 more years of absolute bullshit so I saw no need to "pick a side" for either one of them.  I can show you who I WAS rooting for with this one meme I made:

In my opinion, that result would've rescued America from this quagmire.  But I digress.

My approach to this period of time is from a free speech angle.  How will things of that nature go along under Joe Biden's administration?  Well, one big unfortunate development is the likes of Alexandria Ocasio Cortez demanding there be a list made of Trump's supporters and that they be essentially driven out of society.  

She, of course, is doing this in the wake of that crowd of people storming the Capitol building at that Trump rally.  Granted, that storming was the stupidest thing anybody could've done at that moment.

 From what I could see, these people thought they were having their big patriotic "throwing tea in the Boston Harbor" moment which is why they were taking selfies throughout the whole ordeal and posting them to social media.  However, what they should've realized was that this was actually their "jock fraternity demolishing the nerd's frat house" moment.  If you can recall that moment from the movie Revenge of the Nerds, you can see what I mean.

Anyway, as egregious as their actions were, resorting to full blown McCarthyism never helps anyone.  You can NOT have Mumbly Joe calling for unity in all of his pre-written speeches and then turn around to criminalize a huge percentage of Americans because of their opinions. That violates pretty much every constitutional amendment one can name.  Thankfully, not all Democrats (with more power in all the branches of government) feel this way.  Soon after AOC proposed the beginnings of her own HUAC (House Unwoke Activities Committee) hearings, another member of congress and even part of the "squad" Rashida Tlaib stepped forward and presented some legislation to contradict that.

I don't agree with all of Rashida's politics, but I'm in 100% agreement with her on this. Leave everyone's civil liberties alone. Expressing support for someone should not and never be an arrest able offence.

So, anyway, that's a little taste of free speech under Joe Biden's administration so far.  How would things have faired under a Trump 2nd term?  Well, one big example we all saw was his mishandling of Colin Kaepernick.  However one feels about Colin's gesture to disrespect the national anthem for his own reasons, it is his constitutional right to do so.  As I'm sure we can recall, Trump went on a rampage about this calling him a "son of a bitch" and demanding the NFL fire him.  Geez, talk about government overreach, imposing on a privately owned industry and demanding that a football player denounce his beliefs or lose his job. The same way compelled speech is not free speech, so too that compelled patriotism is not patriotism.  Trump should've left Kaepernick alone and kept doing his job.

But, the MOST heinous assault on free speech happened just one or two days before Trump left office, and this is where stupid evil Mitch comes in.

Trump had announced that he was going to pardon a huge number of people as his last act before stepping down.  A tremendous social media campaign was launched to convince him to drop the charges America had imposed on the embattled journalist Julian Assange thus setting him free.  I won't explain here why Assange is in such trouble and why he needs to be set free now. I'll just post a link to this article I found that gives a good overview of his situation.  The absolute basic issue is that Assange was essentially arrested for doing his job as a journalist by exposing war crimes in Iraq committed by Americans. So keeping him in jail is a threat to true journalism everywhere. If he is allowed to be detained even one second after I've typed this sentence, it means that the only "journalism" allowed are government sanctioned talking pieces who only praise the "deal leaders" in charge whether in public view or shadowy.

Miracle of miracles, the social media campaign had reached Trump's eyes and he was actually prepared to put Julian on his list of pardons.  This is when Flying Monkey Mitch McConnell swooped in and told him "NO"! Mitch even went so far as to threaten Trump (at the time a sitting president) with full indictment in the senate if he freed Assange.  So, Trump felt he had no choice but to deny freedom to Assange yet again.  His acquiescence to appease the senate was a useless gesture because they're going to try to convict him in the senate anyway no matter what.  Trump should've delivered a huge parting blow by pardoning Assange so that the esteemed journalist can get back to work and expose the traitorous actions of the deep state actors in Washington and thus create a better chance to have THEM locked up once and for all.

So, freedom and democracy are dying both because supposed "tough as nails" Trump is actually an easily frightened coward...

"...Brave brave Sir Donny..."

...but also because Bitch McConnell is a deeply evil man who should not be in power.  Of course it's not just him. There are plenty of black-hearted deep state officials working in Washington and in governments all over the world who want to squash freedom in the pursuit of power.  If we the people want to have a better and more free world, we need to champion the honest altruistic heroes like Julian Assange and Edward Snowden while holding big billowing flames to the feet of deep state tyrants like #BitchMcConnell (please get that trending) and/or the neo-McCarthyist scolds like Alexandria Ocasio Cortez.

Keep up the good fight, everyone.  The next four years are going to be just as long as the passed 4 years. Buckle up.

Oscar's New Criteria For Consideration

Just recently, the Academy who gives away sizeable figurines of a naked man with a big............... sledgehammer to anyone who completes production of a movie before the submission deadline released a list of the new standards to be met for their approval.  They are as follows:

And, here is their mission statement:

  

Ok, I can understand the notion of giving people chances who had very little chances before.  Nobody should be denied work experience because of immutable characteristics of themselves.  We should all be encouraging every creative person follow their passions and reach their full potential. However, I'm not so sure that imposing this criteria is the best approach.  As a for instance, I present a tweet from one Justine Bateman.

Many of you might remember her as Mallory Keaton from Family Ties.  These days, she's got a nice career as a film director going for her.  Here's her response to the Academy:

Ok then.  It looks like this film director, who happens to fall under the approved criterium of being a woman, finds the Academy's initiative more insulting than empowering.  My guess is that she would prefer to have her films honoured for their quality and not simply because her identity helped her appear on some diversity checklist.  Are there other industry professionals who feel this way?  Let me know in the comment section below if you so desire. 

Anyone who has followed my blogs or social media feeds for any length of time knows full well that I HAAAAAAAAAATE these kinds of things being imposed on creative people. One of the biggest problems with the entertainment industry (especially mainstream establishments like Hollywood) is that there are more executives and lobby representatives making decisions than there are creative people, whether the production is for theatres, TV, streaming services or otherwise.  It's been like that for decades too long.  Currently in many creative industries, there is actually a position called a "Sensitivity Reader". It is apparently their job to look for anything that anybody anywhere would find offensive or disturbing and insist that the content be removed.  OOOOOOOOOH HO HO HO HOOOOOOOO would I love for one of these people to give a read to either one of the comic books I've published (still very much available on Amazon here and here by the by). They'd innocently start with, "Okay I can see right here where lots of people will be upset..." and my response will be "GOOD!! FUCK 'EM!!" 

"...but they could feel attacked by such dialogue..."

"GOOD!! FUCK 'EM!!"

"...but they could maybe..."

"GOOD!! FUCK 'EM!!"

And that's how it would go until that person quits in disgust and that job position itself is abolished forever.

In 1934, some horrible place called the Hays Office imposed a code on Hollywood movies dictating all the stuff they would NOT allow into movies. In the late 1960's, that code morphed into the rating system of G, PG, etc...  Any movies made before that imposition in 1934 are considered "pre code" movies.  I am looking forward to a "Post Code Hollywood". This will be a utopia where a creative person or a group of creative persons come up with an idea for a movie........ and then proceed to make that movie which is then shown to anyone who wants to see it.  There will be no obnoxious meddlers in the middle of that process inflicting all sorts of demands for censorship based merely on stifling agendas and insatiable egos.  It'll be an uncomplicated world where people tell stories and other people enjoy stories. My God! It'll be beautiful.

Oh but hey!!  This environment of certain anarchy would lead to all sorts of immoral debauchery such as the recent Netflix offering Cuties!!  

HEY HEY!! Whoa there, forthcoming backlash!  No it would not! If something is illegal to do for real in real life then it's illegal to do in a movie.  Yes, murder is illegal, but of course people you see "murdered" in movies aren't actually murdered.  It's all acting, forced perspective, possibly some amounts of red corn syrup (or chocolate syrup) in order to simulate someone being murdered.  The underage girls in Cuties were actually made to do some erotic dancing with the camera getting close ups of their bodies thus they were actually exploited.  

Thus, regular law enforcement would and should get involved in this case.  If police, FBI, or any other actual law enforcement organization need not be involved in the patrolling of a show's production, then no other body should be there either. NOBODY should have any authority over a production except the artists involved.  That's it.  Everyone else should just leave the set, the writing room, the editing room, etc.  If there are any "grass roots" vigilante-type groups that are upset at a show's existence, the proper response to such sentiment is of course "GOOD!! FUCK 'EM!!!" Are we clear on this? Alright!

Ok, now that I've expressed my displeasure about the Academy's new criteria, I'll now give my full assessment of it.  I think that it's................ not that big a deal.  There's no way they're going to retract this now so it looks like it's going to be a part of their organization for a long time.  So, there's no point in trying to do away with it.  What's done is done.  Besides that, I don't think it's nearly as insidious as some people have made it out to be.  I say this for a number of reasons:

1. Keep in mind that this is merely criteria for movies to be "selected for Oscar consideration" not for movies to be made.  Movies like Dude, Where's My Army Tank? or Pauley Shore Joins a Nunnery or any other movie that has absolutely no chance of being looked at by the Academy would need not bother trying to meet this criteria.  Only those that give a shit about winning that golden nudist would have to adhere to any of that.  Besides, I see a loophole that can be used by any all white cis able-bodied male creative group in Hollywood that can't afford to hire new staff or let go of any current staff.

There you go.  To meet the new criteria, just break one of your bro's legs and/or blow an airhorn right in his ear.  You'll fulfill the requirements without any changes in staff.

"Ok then. Our group's diversity has been achieved.  Let's get back to work, honkies!"

2. This is hardly the first time the Oscars have been affected by politics.  One such time was back around 1947.  That was the start of Senator Joe McCarthy seeing up his House Unamerican Activities Committee to blacklist any communist subversives in the USA.  Hollywood was of course one of the hardest hit institutions.  Whether there were communist subversives skulking around is moot.McCarthy's approach was a breach of human rights. Because of this, many professionals in Hollywood felt the icy grip of the HUAC and so were unable to participate in the Oscar ceremony.  The categories for every award was thereby tainted. Rather than for instance "Best Actor" it was more like "Best Actor who managed to avoid being blacklisted............ for now".  So you can see, they were awarded less on merit and more on politics which slanted the Oscars for that year and years to follow during that red scare.

3. This revelation is based on a snarky tweet I saw when this was announced.  I can't for the life of me find it and I'd rather not waste several man-hours trying.  It said something like, "Oh! So now only films from Korea will win Oscars since they certainly won't have too many white people on their creative teams".

I looked at that tweet and thought........ y'know what? I really LIKE this new development.  I would love it if the next winners of Best Picture did go to movies from countries where white people are a minority or virtually nonexistent. I'd love for countries like Korea, Nigeria, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Argentina, Mongolia, Jordan, or any other place with a similar population type to be dominating the Oscars for years to come.  For too long Hollywood has been too favoured.  For decades it's always been the same sacks full of hubris running the same bloated studios who compete in a creatively-inbred jamboree patting each other on the same backs they'll stab minutes later all the while bending over just to see if the sun does still shine out of their lipo-suctioned asses.  All too often, any film from outside of Hollywood are thrown the smallest bone with a "Best Foreign Picture" nomination and/or win.  Well, now it looks like they'll be getting all of the meaty bones while the fading Hollywood moguls will have to beg for table scraps.

This development is not just great for knocking big shots off their pedestals, it will also revive the joy of making movies again.  The entire world has felt intimidated by Hollywood's bombast making it look like they're the ONLY place to make movies in the world.  Every other filmmaker everywhere else had to just be content with making small unassuming little films that only managed to entertain their own country's population.  But now things are different.  These "little sprout" artists have been given a chance to grow into "jolly green giants" of the film industry while all the Hollywood dinosaurs can only sit back and watch it happen.

I guess I should end this blogpost with one all encompassing statement about this new list.  I'll just say that I personally am not entirely supportive of such a thing, since it's something way out of my control I can always find a bright side.  I leave you now with a short film that DOES indeed meet this list's criteria since a good 90% or more of the cast is hispanic AND it did even win an Oscar.  Enjoy!

My Plea For Inducting The Monkees Into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame Already

I do think it is around that time of year when the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame will be deciding who to put on their roster of potential inductees for this year.   The Monkees have certainly been eligible for the longest time now and there have been many many pleas from fans for their induction already.  Yet, somehow, they never seem to get on that list.
The criteria for eligibility into the Hall of Fame is right there on the website:

The Monkees easily meet that.

Their debut release was the song Last Train to Clarksville which came out in August of 1966.  That's well before the 25 year mark. They also certainly contributed to the development and evolution of rock & roll. The most obvious contribution they made was the music video.   The 'Monkee Romps' in the TV episodes were the forerunners of music videos that would later be showcased on MTV.  Also, much more directly than that, Mike Nesmith himself was very influential as a producer in the late 1970's and early 1980's helping shape the look and feel of the music video as we know it today.  Heck, the Monkees even won an Emmy Award for these innovative editing techniques.  If the Emmys can recognize this achievement, what's taking the Hall of Fame so long?

Apparently, for any band to be eligible for induction, all 600 members of the Hall of Fame have to agree on a band's (or artist's) greatness and importance.  So even if 599 members all want a band inducted but 1 member says NO NO NO, then the whole process is at a stalemate and induction doesn't happen. I think that might be the case here.
One such theory that I've heard as to their delay is that there is a fear that inducting the Monkees could lead to the induction of boy bands such as New Kids on the Block, Backstreet Boys, or even One Direction.  This fear is most likely brought on by the way the Monkees were assembled. Rather than forming organically as say the Beatles or the Rolling Stones as a group of friends enthusiastic enough about music to start a band, instead a producer named Don Kirshner auditioned 75 young men and eventually settled on 4 to make the band.  Don Kirshner's original vision was to have a fake band for a TV show where 4 handsome young boys were the faces while a real band worked behind the scenes writing and performing all of the songs. (The song writing team in this case being Boyce & Hart by the way.)  That right there is the manufactured element of The Monkees that people objected to which pigeon-holes them into the 'boy band' category.

However, the 4 lads, Micky, Mikey, Peter, and Davey almost immediately rebelled against this set up.  Mike Nesmith himself had big ambitions of being a singer/song writer. He was not about to just settle into a state of following orders while some other song writing team had all the fun.  So, they all got Don Kirshner completely annexed from his own project while they took more of the reigns of the creative aspect of the show and the songs.  Both Mike Nesmith and Peter Tork would constantly be composing songs for the Monkees to perform and quite a few of them did end up on the show and on their performing roster.
Now, I'd say that open rebellion against corporate forces keeping you down is a verifiable demonstration of the spirit of rock & roll.  It's a pity that the Hall of Fame doesn't see it that way.  Oh, in fact, I found something on the Hall of Fame's website that perked my interest a little:

Ok, so the Hall of Fame decry the Monkees as a "corporate and manufactured band" but then turn right around and induct the one element that made them look corporate and manufactured.  How did that happen?

Hey, Hall of Fame, why don't you induct the lightning storm that brought down Buddy Holly's plane while you're at it?

Or how about inducting the ham sandwich that Mama Cass choked on?

How about that Hell's Angel that killed someone at Altamonte?  I think that would fit.

Why not induct Elvis Presley's bowel obstruction?

Or what the heck? Let's induct Mark David Chapman already.  There can be a nice display with his dirty shoes under glass, the same dirty shoes he was wearing while squatting in the bushes in front of John Lennon's apartment waiting for him to return from his daily errands.

Or, hey, how about inducting the Mensa genius who told Cher that using auto-tune for her Life After Love song would work well.

DURR! CHER SOUND GOOOOOOOOOOOOD!!!

No! No she did not!

Ok Ok! Maybe Don Kirshner is not as bad as all of that.  I may have gotten a little carried away with hyperbole (something I never normally do [wink emoji] ).  I'm sure Don has enough accomplishments to his name that his induction is indeed warranted.  Here's his mini-bio:

So that checks out.  But I still consider it both a slap in the face and a quick toss under the bus to give this much attention to Mr. Kirshnir but then completely dismiss and ignore the guys who made the Monkees as successful as they were.

I'll end this post and plea by embedding on of their songs: You Just Might Be The One.  It's not one of their more popular or prestigious songs for sure.  The reason I chose it is because it is one of the songs where the 4 guys, Mickey Dolenz, Mike Nesmith, Peter Tork, and Davey Jones are the only musicians playing on it.  The evidence I am providing can be found in this Monkees box set that I have:

Here are the liner notes for that song from the little booklet inside:

So there's you have it.  That's my piece on why The Monkees MORE than deserve their Rock & Roll Hall of Fame induction.  Now here's that song:

Is Kilroy Worth It?

I just recently got back from a vacation in the Philippines so I just now caught the tail end of the craziness surrounding the Kilroy Event.  I'm feeling a weird mixed bag of emotions about it and I'm not entirely sure what to say.  But, being someone who paid the $250 for the 'ultimate package' and making not just one but two blog posts promoting it, I guess I'm somewhat obliged to say something.

I'm not going to 'brutally attack' anyone for their opinions of the event. Everyone has their own reasons for feeling that way.  Tim Pool's experience is quite an eye-opener though.

Yeah, those contracts Tim talks about seem rather puzzling to me.
 They kind of have that 'insecure girlfriend/boyfriend' vibe to them in a way.  Just like the gf that insists "I SAW YOU CHECKING OUT HER BUTT!!!" or the bf that shouts "OOOOOOOH!!! SO YOU AND JIMMY ARE JUUUUUUUUST FRIENDS!!! REALLY???!!!", these contracts seem to be insisting, "YOU'D BETTER DAMN FUCKING WELL TAKE THIS CONFERENCE SERIOUSLY WITH NO BACKING OUT OVER SOME 'SCHEDULE CONFLICT' BULLSHIT!!!"  That's my interpretation anyway.

I'm also not too thrilled with the stifling of guests' speeches that lean more to the 'alt-right' or whatever term they prefer.  Maybe the organizers want to cut down on the inevitable Antifa violence, but that's not a good way to go about it.  Free speech means free speech for all and it should definitely remain that way for a Free Speech convention.  Like it's been said elsewhere, sunlight is the best disinfectant.  All views need to be put out into the world so that they can be challenged with debate and such.  Stifling any ideas is unconstitutional, undemocratic, and highly dangerous.  Those bad ideas will just fester underground which could manifest themselves in very destructive ways.
I know good ol' Dickie Spencer has expressed interest in speaking at this event.  I know he's, shall we say, the opposite of popular with many people.  But I think I thought of a solution that could please everyone, even the most adamant Antifa thugs.  Two words: dunk tank!  Let Dickie spout his views from the security of a dunk tank where nobody can physically hurt him, yet at the same time everyone has a great opportunity to release their outrage with him.  I see the price going as follows:

Ask Dickie a question: $2
Get 3 Balls to Throw at the Target: $3 (so $1 per ball)
1 question and 3 balls: $5

See, that could be fun for everyone.

But, in fairness, I'll let one of the event's organizers, whose youtube name is "Based Mama", tell it in her own words in her video embedded below.



So there we go. I went all "Trump on Charlottesville" there and presented both sides.  I'll let everyone reading this decide for themselves who's "Ghandii" and who's "Hitler" in this scenario.  My biggest concern about this event mostly involves me and the decisions I make for this day forward.

This blog post I'm making is meant to answer the question in the title: is the Kilroy Event still worth attending?

Like I said at the top, I paid the big $250 to help get this event going. However, I still have yet to book a flight and a hotel room in Phoenix, so my commitment isn't entirely 100% yet.  I figured I would deal with this event after my Philippines vacation first.  But now that that's happened, I can wrestle with this Kilroy situation more.

So, the question remains, do I think it's worth it to attend Kilroy and will I be going?  The answer to both questions is: YES!

I know lots of big speakers who were scheduled to be there have pulled out which looks very bad. However, I still think it will be a rather sizeable event with many people in attendance.  That's still an ideal environment for the self-promotion intentions I have going into this conference in the first place.  I can still schmooze with people and promote my book whenever and wherever possible.

Also, Andy Warski announced on his channel that even though he very angrily pulled out of Kilroy, he still intends to be in Phoenix to organize a pub crawl of sorts.  He'll do that to benefit anyone who paid good money to see him speak there.  I would gladly attend both Kilroy and that pub crawl.  That's just as good a place to promote my book as any. In fact it might even be a better venue for that.  So that's another good reason to be in Phoenix on April 21 & 22.

Another good reason for me to stay optimistic is that there is still time to turn this around. It's still just a few months away. There's plenty of time and opportunity for others to get involved and help make it a success.  Remember, this was inspired by the censorious nature of other conventions like the one experienced at VicCon last June.  Kilroy is supposed to be a huge piece of artillery against this climate of censorship.  Don't let our stealth bomber deteriorate into a slingshot.  Don't just sit back and watch it burn, dig your heels in and do something.  Just because they've "lost Faith", it doesn't mean we have to.

You saw what I did there I'm sure.  Should I have done that?  Well, it's too late now.

So anyway, that's my assessment of the whole Kilroy situation.  Whether you plan on attending, or just want to heckle and meme from the sidelines, it's all cool.  Whatever happens, it will be an exciting weekend destined for the history books.

See you Keks there or whatever.