Quiz Show Hosts & Evil Ghosts

Thank you and a most cordial welcome…   — Jack Barry

There’s nothing on top, but a bucket and a mop…  –The Meat Puppets, “Plateau”

If you’re like me, you are intrigued by game shows. When it gets to the big money, it gets exciting, and few can resist watching. It’s human interest, and that’s the rapture & the problem, all in one package. You have to be a capitalist to love game shows and never outgrow them, because they’re all about winning, whether it’s money, prizes, dates, or whatever.

It’s about performing in front of a live studio audience, and being on TV, as that’s where game shows exist. Since television & game shows are synonymous, let’s examine its history as a medium. The television was invented in 1927, but wasn’t practical for households until ~1938, when cathode ray tube life was extended by 50 times, making televisions more affordable & reliable.

After World War II (& then Korea), television set sales boomed, and broadcast television soon came into being, instantly becoming a cultural phenomenon that resonates up to today. In 1948, four television networks, (NBC, CBS, ABC, and DuMont), began broadcasting over 128 stations, a full prime-time schedule (8 to 11pm), seven days a week. The first TV season that was rated by Nielsen Media is 1950-51, which is where measurable television analysis starts.

Footnote; The DuMont Television Network was the black sheep network that died, hampered by the prohibitive cost of broadcasting, and by regulations imposed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) which restricted their growth. The company’s partner, Paramount Pictures also sabotaged DuMont, ensuring its eventual demise & carve-up by the big three networks. The DuMont Television Network did not have a radio network from which to draw big-name talent, affiliate loyalty or radio profits to underwrite television operations until the television medium itself became profitable.

DuMont broadcast National Football League games from 1951-55, which was a first. DuMont produced more than 20,000 television episodes during the decade from 1946 to 1956. Because the shows were created prior to the launch of Ampex’s electronic videotape recorder in late 1956, all of them were initially broadcast live in black and white, then recorded on film kinescope for reruns and for West Coast rebroadcasts. The DuMont Television Network kinescopes were dumped into New York’s East River over 50 years ago, as they were seen by the bosses as worthless, with too-high storage costs.

The DuMont Television Network ignored the standard business model of 1950s TV, in which one advertiser sponsored an entire show, allowing it to have complete control over its content. Instead, DuMont sold commercials to many different advertisers, freeing producers of its shows from the power of single sponsors. This eventually became the standard model for US television. It’s important to understand this advertising model in relation to network quiz shows, and how they were fixed from 1956-59.

The quiz show scandals ultimately resulted in the networks eliminating sponsor-controlled programming in prime-time broadcasting, which would then allow them to take control of production. By the end of 1959, all first generation big-money quizzes were gone, along with single-sponsorship television. Soon-to-come, were federal laws against fixing television quiz shows. The networks stayed away from awarding five-figure cash jackpots until the 1970’s, when they were brought back, re-branded as “game shows” such as the $10,000 Pyramid.

The $64,000 Question hosted by Hal March became an overnight #1 show in 1955. US President Dwight Eisenhower was a loyal (& eventually heartbroken) fan of this rigged weekly event. Notice in the video above, how Hal March can translate Italian perfectly, when the correct answer is given by a lady (in the category of American history) who speaks fluent Italian, but broken English.

The impropriety of a contestant having a translator [!] to help her is surreal. The audience is befuddled by all this, but applauds on cue nonetheless. Then watch what happens around 26:00, when the British male contestant is stumped… How humiliating!  For Hal March.

The $64,000 Challenge was the day-time spin-off hosted first by Sonny Fox, then Ralph Story. Star contestants on The $64,000 Question/Challenge later appeared on television & in movies throughout the 1950s & 1960s. Quiz shows were often used as vehicles to promote & place new talent, and industry favorites including: Patty Duke, Connie Hines (Mr. Ed), Dr. Joyce Brothers (below), Xavier Cugat, and many others. Every one of these quiz show productions was rigged by their sponsors, as they played their audiences for suckers.

The $64,000 Question earned the #1 rating spot for the 1955–56 season, finished at #4 in the 1956–57 season ,and #20 in 1957–58. Among its progeny were Tic-Tac-Dough, and Twenty-One.

The $64,000 Challenge was controlled by cosmetics giant Revlon & Lorillard Tobacco Company’s Kent cigarettes. It was revealed during Congressional investigations that Revlon was as determined to keep their shows appealing, by manipulating the results.

Unlike Twenty-One and Dotto, where contestants got the answers in advance, Revlon was far more subtle with The $64,000 Question/Challenge, asking questions suited towards a contestant’s field of expertise, in order to coax correct answers out of them. The same method could be applied in reverse for “undesirable” contestants.

The Archive of American Television feature on the quiz show scandal, aired in 2000, has an interview of Albert Freedman who explains how he was producing Tic-Tac-Dough when Jack Barry & Dan Enright approached him about working on Twenty-One, which had very poor ratings.

Albert Freedman joined the show and was told to come up with some ideas for saving it. The problem, explained Freedman, was that the contestants were losing too quickly. “The excitement is to build up the winner, week after week.” He said that the idea of fixing the game’s outcomes was seen as necessary to reviving an otherwise boring program. “When I took over Twenty-One, I was aware that control was necessary.”

The sponsor of Twenty-One was Geritol, a dietary supplement pharmaceutical. Geritol advertised that just two tablespoons of their “medicine” had “twice the iron as a pound of calf’s liver,” helping people with “tired blood.” These were slimy snake oil salesmen, selling sickness way back in the 1950’s. The lesson is: know your TV history, or be doomed to bad re-runs. The fact is Albert Freedman coached the performances of Herbert Stempel, Charles Van Doren and other contestants on Twenty-One, with Van Doren “beating” Stempel on Dec. 5, 1956. This was the subject of Robert Redford’s 1994 film, Quiz Show.

Vivienne Nearing made headlines in 1957 when she dethroned Charles Van Doren as champion on Twenty-One, after his four-month run. In 1960, Vivienne Nearing & 14 other Twenty-One contestants were charged with perjury, after falsely testifying to a grand jury, that they had not been fed answers.

Albert Freedman was indicted for perjury in 1958, for lying to a grand jury in saying that he had not given questions to contestants. Before another grand jury, he recanted his testimony and admitted giving questions in advance. Twenty-One was canceled in 1958. The perjury charges against Freedman and all others were eventually dropped. Those found guilty had their sentences suspended, and no one involved in the quiz show scandal ever went to prison in this vast conspiracy to manipulate & defraud the American television viewing public.

Dotto was billed as a combination of a general knowledge quiz, and the children’s game of connect-the-dots. Jack Narz was the host, with Colgate-Palmolive as its presenting sponsor. Dotto rose to become the highest rated daytime program in 1958, after replacing Strike it Rich in CBS’s daytime time slot in January, 1958. In a rare instance of two networks programming the same show, a weekly nighttime edition of Dotto was launched on July 1, 1958, on NBC on Tuesday nights.

Both shows were hits, until Dotto was canceled without public explanation, over the weekend of August 16, 1958. As far as I can see, no one has ever accurately explained what happened. After reviewing the only available episodes, and the facts that have come out in the aftermath, it’s pretty clear what happened. Just watch this one episode all the way through. I’ll explain its contents below.

Episode Summary: Returning Dotto champion, Marie Winn had been provided with the answers ahead of time. A stand-by contestant, Edward Hilgemeier, Jr. found her notebook backstage with the questions & answers written in it. He tore out the pages, and turned them over to authorities without going on the show. Hilgemeier and the defeated contestant Yaffe Kimball, confronted the Dotto producers, and both were paid money to keep quiet. When Hilgemeier found out he was paid less than Yaffe Kimball, he contacted CBS (daytime version), NBC (prime-time version), and sponsor Colgate-Palmolive– all to no avail.

Hilgemeier then contacted federal authorities in early August, 1958 with his story, which was then relayed to CBS. Executive vice president of CBS Thomas Fisher tested kinescopes of the show against Winn’s notebook and concluded that the show appeared fixed. Executives at CBS series met with its creator, Frank Cooper, concerning the potential rigging of the show on the evening of Friday, August 15. Frank Cooper admitted that the show was indeed fixed, and CBS then reported these findings to NBC as the hosts of the prime-time version.

Over the weekend of August 16, 1958, both CBS & NBC canceled Dotto. CBS immediately moved its game show Top Dollar, hosted by Warren Hull, to Dotto’s time slot. On Monday, August 18, a live studio audience expecting to be seated for Monday’s episode of Dotto was instead set up as an audience for Top Dollar. Viewers were greeted by the opening, “Dotto, the program which normally airs at this time, will no longer be seen. Instead…welcome to Top Dollar!”

Jack Narz eventually replaced Warren Hull (more on him below) as host of Top Dollar by November 1958, which completed this dirty cycle of quiz show hosts, as Strike it Rich, which preceded Dotto, had been hosted by Hull. Top Dollar ran in the daytime until October, 1959, as Narz (below) continued to work as a game show host for most of the next twenty years, until his death.

Note: In the Dotto episode above, host Jack Narz says goodbye to the Native American woman contestant, Yaffe Kimball who “lost,” by raising his hand and saying HOW [!] to her as she leaves the stage at 11:28. Look & listen for it.

Dotto promo, sponsored by Ford: Here’s a look at what you could win if you can identify this Dotto image,,, the Edsel Bermuda [Ooooh’s from the audience], the newest ideas in station wagons, with almost 9 feet of load space with the tailgate down. It has Edsel’s famous “teletouch-drive,” that puts the shift buttons in the middle of the steering wheel– where they belong!” There’s also “self-adjusting brakes… A car for him, a car for her, a car for a lifetime.” There’s even a kiddie model that drives up to 5 MPH.

Notice how the audience loves it, as their enthusiasm for these luxuries was/is real. Edsel was a gas-guzzling, unsafe-at-any-speed model that was hyped by the Ford Motor Company from 1958-60. Dotto was an early establishment answer to Elvis Presley, Buddy Holly, Fats Domino, Little Richard & rock & roll’s massive teen influence. This was a cultural war for the control of kids’ minds. It somehow feels like J. Edgar Hoover is behind this show.

21:45 Jack Narz [to the new contestant]: Hmmm. Very confusing, huh?

At this point the viewer should realize that the only thing that matters in Dotto is identifying the image correctly. Answering the questions correctly is irrelevant. Also note that the images drawn in Dotto are indecipherable, as are the “clues.” This is all by design.

26:15 After a few minutes of learning all about new velvety Vel, dish soap, it’s back to the game. The new challenger doesn’t present himself as very bright, yet he suddenly rings in and identifies Dotto’s vague lines & shapes as “Huey & Dewey Duck,” which is correct!

But not completely, because everyone in 1958 knows that there are three nephews of Donald Duck, and they always hang together. Louie is the third, but the contestant forgot to write him down on the “Dottograph.”  Below is a screenshot of the image in question. Do you see Donald Duck’s nephews in it? I see Elvis.

So Jack Narz, who was “as much in the dark as anybody,” changes the narrative, and says this answer may not be correct, and will need a further ruling– later, backstage. Over to Marie Winn, who has 60 seconds to make the correct identification of these squiggly lines & nebulous forms to force a tie, otherwise she’s off the show.

Amazingly, Maria Winn pulls it out, by shyly mumbling “Donald Duck’s nephews,” with some encouragement from Jack Narz. There’s a big smile from Marie Winn, when she’s told she’s correct! Jack Narz: “I know we have a tie game now, and that solves our problem.”

Not quite, as it’s clear to any television viewer (past or present) with any cognitive function, that this greenhorn who incredibly identified the crude image as Donald Duck’s nephews, yet inexplicably forgot to include the name of the third one (Louie), blew the fix with his incomplete answer. And with that, Dotto had to be dropped immediately & forever. The running time on this essential video of television history is 29:31, and at least 25 minutes of it is advertising, in every form imaginable. This rigged quiz show called Dotto may have been the most evil show ever hyped on television.

Footnote: Marie Winn perjured herself to the grand jury investigation on quiz show fixing. She then declared herself a feminist sometime later, publishing The Plug-In Drug (1977), a confused diatribe on the dangers of educating children, claiming it to be dangerous to their psychological health.

Tic-Tac-Dough’s initial 1956–59 run on NBC was another Jack Barry & Dan Enright creation & production– a common thread with all these rigged quiz shows. Tic-Tac-Dough was based on tic-tac-toe, where contestants answer questions to score an X or O. If you’ve ever played tic-tac-toe, you know that most games end in ties, unless you’re playing against a total moron. Games that frequently ended in ties, was another leitmotif of the fixed quiz show era. The original host of Tic-Tac-Dough was Jack Barry, followed by Gene Rayburn & Bill Wendell. Jay Jackson & Win Elliot hosted prime time adaptations, and all were involved or had knowledge of quiz show fixing.

Tic-Tac-Dough’s April 3, 1958 episode (below) featuring U.S. military serviceman Michael O’Rourke winning over $140,000, hosted by Jay Jackson, became a key subject of the federal grand jury investigating the quiz fixing. Notice how neither player ever goes for the win. Howard Felsher produced Tic-Tac-Dough; Password; Password Plus; Super Password; He Said, She Said; Concentration; and most notably, Family Feud.

Felsher was known as the “Game Show Doctor” in certain circles for his ability to come in and fix a show– in every sense of the term. As producer of Tic-Tac-Dough, Felsher was in charge of all aspects of the shows production including choosing the contestants, coaching them, and feeding them the answers. Howard Felsher also estimated that about 75% of all Tic-Tac-Dough nighttime shows had been rigged.

In a span over just over 4 months at the end of 1958, these following quiz shows were implicated in the scandal and were abruptly canceled: Dotto on August 16, The $64,000 Challenge on September 14, Twenty-One on October 16, The $64,000 Question on November 9, and Tic-Tac-Dough on December 29.

In September 1958, a New York grand jury called the producers & hosts who had coached contestants, to appear in testimony. It was later estimated by a prosecutor on the case that of the 150 sworn witnesses before the panel, only 50 told the truth. Among the most egregious perjurers were Jack Barry, Dan Enright & Frank Cooper. None of the corporate sponsors were implicated, or compelled to testify under oath.

There are those who make the claim that Jack Barry was effectively blacklisted from national television until 1969. That’s an insult & misrepresentation of blacklisting. This was the era of McCarthyism, HUAC & anti-communism. The ones who defied the red-baiting & witch-hunts were blacklisted. Jack Barry was exiled from game show television for a decade for cheating, before being allowed to return and make more millions– with The Jokers Wild, etc.

Dan Enright went to Canada to continue working in television, and was unable to get a job in American television until 1975.  Once again, that’s not a blacklist, which occurs to people who have courage & principles. These are criminals, who escaped punishment because the scandal was so vast, it would have taken down all the networks and their crooked sponsors. If that happened, there would be no television run by capitalists, and that couldn’t happen, so the quiz show scandal was swept under the rug, to be forgotten in posterity.

Another Barry/Enright fixed quiz show of the era was High Low, a contestant-panel game. Wikipedia (a source heavily cited in this piece) delivers this refrain over & over concerning the availability of quiz show episodes with this disclaimer, which applies to High Low: “Only one episode is known to exist, as all others are believed to have been destroyed due to network policies of the era.”  Criminality & cover-ups are the network policies to which Wikipedia is referring.

Capitalizing on the success of the 1950s big-money quiz The $64,000 Question on CBS, Jack Barry and Dan Enright developed their flagship show, Twenty-One, a quiz which had a scoring system based loosely on Blackjack. Contestants were placed in twin “isolation booths” and were asked questions ranging in value from 1 to 11 points — the higher the point value, the more difficult the question. Beginning on September 12, 1956, Jack Barry began hosting Twenty-One in prime time.

Enright described the initial broadcast of Twenty-One as “a dismal failure. It was just plain dull.” Contestants repeatedly missed questions and, in Enright’s own words, “It lacked all drama; it lacked all suspense. The next morning the sponsor Geritol, called my partner, Jack Barry and me, and told us in no uncertain terms that he never wanted to see a repeat of what happened the previous night. And from that moment on, we decided to rig Twenty-One.” Even with rigging, initial ratings were unimpressive.

Enright believed they needed to find heroes & villains — contestants the audience would either root for or against. Though not illegal at the time, Enright and his assistant producer Albert Freedman went beyond merely finding appealing players by actually manipulating them: providing certain contestants with answers in advance, and scripting games and the players’ mannerisms in the isolation booth. It was a process the producers duplicated for Tic-Tac-Dough.

Dan Enright’s most famous contestant protégé was Twenty-One’s Charles Van Doren, who went on to win for 14 weeks and became a cover subject for Time magazine (above), thus causing the show’s popularity to soar. Van Doren replaced Herbert Stempel, who himself had been given answers over his extended run on the show, but was eventually forced to lose (so that the prettier Van Doren could replace him). After waiting for Enright to fulfill his promise of a job in exchange for throwing the match, Stempel realized it would never come and he went to the authorities. It was only when other contestants came forward about game show rigging did the New York DA’s office take Herbert Stempel seriously.

As the press was publishing allegations by former contestants of quiz rigging, NBC purchased from Barry & Enright the shows: Twenty-One and Tic-Tac-Dough; along with two new daytime entries, Concentration, and a musical quiz Dough Re Mi, for $1 million.

Eventually a fraction of the truth came out, and Dan Enright admitted to rigging the show and giving contestants the questions and answers in advance. Twenty-One’s emcee and co-producer, Jack Barry, must have been in on it, despite decades of denials by him and his fans.

Strike it Rich is down there with Dotto, and the others mentioned above, as perhaps the sleaziest show in TV history. Just watch, and you’ll see what I mean, as I’ll conclude this piece with the only episode of Strike it Rich that is available (above). I then add some poignant comments & screenshots for illustration… And now Fab’s fabulous Ambassador of Goodwill, Mr. Strike-it-Rich himself, Warren Hull!

New Fab contains miracle Duratex!

Look for Fab at your supermarket. It’s the blue box with white letters etched in red, just remember F-A-B. I’m talking to all of you out there who have never tried Fab. When you go there and see this, you’ll have an impulse to buy it, after listening to me. This is no Hull-lying, this is honest-to-goodness gospel . Okay Ralph [Story], who’s next?

Let’s take a look at a girl who has some really exciting wash-day news she wants to share with you!

Final Answer– No Takebacks: I love game shows too much to end this piece on such a cynical vibe. I consider myself a game-show host hybrid of Bob Barker & Chuck Barris, if you can get to that. My favorite game show moments over the years include watching Wink Martindale’s Tic-Tac-Dough champion Thom McKee’s run in 1980, and his defeat. I was a kid and it was exciting to watch. Was it fixed?  Whoever knows, ain’t tellin’, that much I do know.

Ken Jennings’ run on Jeopardy in 2004 was surely legitimate, including a brilliant innovation in focusing on being quick on the buzzer. Brad Rutter has repeatedly beat Jennings in Jeopardy’s Tournament of Champions, so that’s amazing! In 2011, these two “Masters of Jeopardy,” faced off against Watson, an AI computer. Consider this result:

The greatest all-time, one-day game show performance belongs to Michael Larson on Press Your Luck in 1984. Larson memorized the five different randomizer sequences used on the “Big Board” (image below) and beat the game, taking home over $110,000 in one game that stretched over two episodes.

Notice that he didn’t have any extraordinary knowledge of trivia, and it totally didn’t matter. Something else mattered much more, and he figured it out first. This is hilarious viewing, as host Peter Tomarken goes bananas in disbelief.  That’s how you KNOW he beat the show.

If you want to cheat ahead; the action starts at 13;45 in this video below, when Larson answers “Polka,”  knowing with delight that he now has 7 Spins in Round 2, and will be first up. From there on it’s game-show Nirvana. A beautiful streak is a winning thing.

CBS tried to cheat Michael Larson (RIP), out of his winnings in the weeks after. And what was with that bitch dental hygienist, passing her 3 spins to Larson at the end?  The other opponent Ed, intentionally didn’t do that, as a point of honor & respect. It almost cost Michael Larson on his last spin, where he got lucky. The lesson, go for it & enjoy it while it lasts!

…………………..<>>><><><>………………

Sinking the P.M.S. #MeToo

Here’s a final review of the facts pertaining to the Kavanaugh hearings, which kept changing, seemingly by the hour at certain points during this degraded media circus & cynical political theater. Christine Blasey Ford, a university professor in California, has accused US Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her when they were teenagers at a small party in high school. Ms. Debbie Ramirez, who currently works for a county housing department in Boulder, Colorado has alleged that Kavanaugh exposed his genitals to her during a party their freshman year at Yale.

This all allegedly occurred during the mid-1980’s, with shifting dates, circumstances and interested parties; many of whom changed their stories repeatedly, depending on the political situation. This was political fiction from the start: made up, coached, and presented as genuine to the American people by Nancy Pelosi & the Democrats (below), who refused to attack arch-reactionary Brett Kavanaugh from the left.

As to the supplemental FBI investigation, it was closed on Wednesday (Oct 3) and sent to Capitol Hill on Thursday for review by all members of the US Senate. An initial vote is set for today: Friday October, 5. A sure-to-be contentious confirmation vote is scheduled for Saturday.

Senators Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) & Susan Collins (R-Maine), who earlier indicated they were “on the fence,” have stated they are satisfied with the results of the FBI’s supplemental investigation, signaling they will vote with their party for confirmation of Kavanaugh. What the few “swing” Democrats do is of no consequence at this point (yet it’s still breathlessly reported & speculated in the media), as partisan sentiment has been galvanized on both sides of the aisle. Republicans still have the 51-49 majority.

According to the New York Times, “an official who reviewed the FBI’s material said the bureau contacted 10 people and interviewed nine of them. The 10th person refused to be interviewed. Those interviewed included Ms. Ramirez and three people whom Dr. Blasey recalled being in the house at the time of the party: Mr. [Mark] Judge, P.J. Smyth and Leland Keyser. All three have said they did not remember the party or witness misbehavior by Judge Kavanaugh. Republicans briefed on their F.B.I. interviews said they had said nothing to change that. Also interviewed were two other high school friends of Judge Kavanaugh: Chris Garrett and Tim Gaudette.” [1]

The “10th person,” the one who refused to be interviewed by the FBI, is presumably Julie Swetnick, who surfaced late in the game as Kavanaugh’s third accuser. Pictured above is her attorney Michael Avenatti. On Sunday September 30, the Associated Press reported revelations that Swetnick has a history of lying & claiming sexual assault, and then later being proven wrong in court. It turns out that you can’t always believe a woman. Who knew?

Allegations floated in the media are one thing, but false testimony to the FBI is another. One can be criminally prosecuted for lying to the FBI during an official investigation. Julie Swetnick went on-the-air, coast-to-coast, and soon walked back earlier allegations she made through the media, and declined a FBI interview through her attorney. I keep pointing out that the Republicans are better at dirty tricks campaigns than the Democrats, and I’ve been proven correct again.

This campaign to torpedo the Kavanaugh hearings has completely backfired, as the P.M.S. #MeToo is now sinking into a political abyss, right before our very eyes. Any leads that Democratic Party candidates had in competitive races (at all levels– local, state & federal), have just gotten tougher for their candidates because of this political stunt the Democrats tried to pull. The Republicans were there to bust them, because it was entirely fiction. In poker terms, Brett Kavanaugh is a pair of three’s, and the Democrats tried to bluff with Queen-high– in front of everybody. The only progressive aspect to this entire sordid affair is witnessing (& helping!) a vicious, vaginal political vessel go down.

We don’t judge Christine Blasey Ford based on the ‘believability’ of her courtroom performance. That’s how we measure actors & actresses. This is jurisprudence, where corroboration of evidence, witnesses & physical evidence are what’s judged. This is a court-of-law proceeding in the US Senate to determine if an arch-reactionary Republican judge will take a seat on the US Supreme Court, and give it a 5-4 hard-right majority. The issues at stake for the American people are of immense importance, with many interests & viewpoints that should be discussed & examined before any confirmation.

Brett Kavanaugh is a fascist, yet he has been turned into a victim by the reactionary machine of the Democratic Party. This was a campaign to unleash feminist hate, and fire up its upper-middle class base. But when it blows up in their faces this badly, it does nothing but demoralize the ranks and poison the waters. The energy of feminist supporters has gone down, and fascism is again emboldened in this political climate. The undecided’s who were leaning anti-Trump, will now swing the other way or stay home in greater numbers on November 6th. They will be harder to convince to vote Democrat, as who wants to be on the losing side of this disgrace?

Fri 05 Oct 2018 03:30:09 PM EDT

This contemptible charade needs one final update before it finishes playing out in the Senate. This piece was published just after midnight. Around noon today it was reported in the Huffington Post that Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) will vote against Brett Kavanaugh on Saturday. Murkowski now says, “he’s not the right man for the Supreme Court.”

This was obviously a pre-arrangement by the puppet masters, to allow Murkowski some political cover as she already did her job by voting along party lines for cloture earlier this morning, which was necessary to move to a confirmation vote. This female senator’s defection makes tomorrow’s confirmation vote 50-50, with VP Mike Pence holding the tiebreaker vote.

You have to admit (from a political perspective), that the GOP are playing this as well as they can, all the way to its inglorious end. The fascists are “smarter” than the “liberals,” if that makes any sense, and it shouldn’t. As far as the Democrats go, unless they can get Republican Susan Collins of Maine to flip, then #MeToo is officially sunk. Look for all this & more, coming soon a video screen near you!!

As we can see, all this came down to bourgeois identity & partisan politics. The #MeToo ship is sunk, because it had the power to stop the Kavanaugh confirmation. Two Republican senators are women, who could have been pressured by a Democratic Party defense of abortion rights, to vote “No.” But instead, #MeToo made it about themselves. #MeOnly would be a better label for them.

The #MeToo campaign is the most-self-centered, obnoxiously foul, and intellectually bankrupt political concoction in modern political history. The CIA Democrats invented & created this Bride of Frankenstein, as their version of KKK & Nazi shock troops. #MeToo is a tool of the deep state, and uses the same language & methods of hate as fascists.

Sat 06 Oct 2018 04:35:32 PM EDT

The same way Donald Trump won the US Presidency in 2016, Brett Kavanaugh was confirmed to the US Supreme Court for life today. The final tally was 50-48, as Alaskan Republican Lisa Murkowski, who said she would vote “No,” withdrew her vote. Democrat Joe Manchin of West Virginia voted “Yes,” as the fix was in all the way for fascism.

This goes back to when the Trump administration released it’s initial list & then final choice back in June. It took a few months to vet & background check Kavanaugh, and they were always confident the allegations by Christine Blasey Ford (and any others) were unprovable– which they were.

Dianne Feinstein (D-Ca) waited for the right moment, and then played her #MeToo cards in such a clumsy & obvious manner that their entire campaign was exposed for its rotten politics. This is nothing less that a political disaster for the Democratic Party, allowing another reactionary blow against the working class & their democratic rights.

See also:

#MeToo Shipwrecks Itself

Brett Kavanaugh & a Pause for the “Cos”

…………….<><>><><><>…………..

#MeToo Shipwrecks Itself

In what will forever be known in political history as the “Kavanaugh hearings,” we are witnessing festering partisan animosities bursting open like an abscess on our TV & computer screens. This composite photo (below) from the Senate Judiciary Committee during Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill on Thursday, Sept. 27, deserves careful scrutiny– as BOTH are professional liars & fascists.

A healthy & rational mind can observe that NONE of this has anything to do with the truth, as this is a cynical exercise in manipulation of public opinion. It’s all just a warm-up (and tie-in) for the mid-terms on November 6th.

The FBI was brought into the fray on Friday (9/28), when Republican Senate leaders agreed to allow a limited, additional background check of Brett Kavanaugh. Since he’s already been extensively “vetted,” it is to be limited in scope to the existing allegations, with a completion deadline of one week. That’s how the GOP wraps Brett Kavanaugh up in a bow, and sends a fascist to the House for confirmation as Justice for the US Supreme Court.

The #MeToo Democrats, who are now foundering on the rocks, are screaming for more time, saying “no artificial time limitations” should be placed on the special FBI investigation, which will be solely interviews from the names we already know all-too-well in this phony sex scandal. These hysterical feminist manipulators never know when to quit, or shut up.

The puppet-master behind this media scandal appears to be 2020 Democratic presidential hopeful Michael Avenatti, who represents all three women that have made sexual assault allegations against Kavanaugh: Christine Blasey Ford, Deborah Ramirez & Julie Swetnick. Avenatti coincidentally is also the attorney for porn star Stormy Daniels.

It needs to be acknowledged that the Democrats could have attacked arch-reactionary Brett Kavanaugh from many other angles, and easily defeated his nomination. Anyone who has such an extensive record of being pro-torture & anti-democratic, shouldn’t even be considered for the Supreme Court, raising the issue of the initial list of candidates from Donald Trump. This entire Supreme Court nomination process has been disgraceful, in it’s lack of seriousness.

Here’s a brief on Brett Kavanaugh. He worked with Kenneth Starr, in the reactionary Republican coup attempt to oust a twice-elected US President. Kavanaugh then conspired with Bush/Cheney during Bush v. Gore, which stole a Presidential election for the Republicans in 2000. Kavanaugh is an opponent of the Environmental Protection Agency, and a friend of corporate polluters. He supports executive supremacy, which endears him to Trump, and is an enemy of abortion rights. The only way the Democratic party could lose this political fight to defeat Kavanaugh, is if they didn’t care– and they don’t.

The list of twenty-five-or-so judges that Trump supposedly had under consideration are all reactionaries– every one of them. Where were the protestations from the Democratic party back then? They were too busy running their #MeToo & Russian meddling campaigns in our faces, to be bothered with defending the democratic rights of it’s voting constituency.

Only the #MeToo Democrats could make a fascist like Brett Kavanaugh look like a martyr, by attacking him from the right. In the same manner, Hillary Clinton’s elitism & campaign blundering allowed Donald Trump to become US president. Incompetent & bird-brained reaction at every turn defines a #MeToo Democrat. It’s not even been a year since this campaign was rolled out, but in that time, more money has been wasted in paying an army of political hacks & flunky feminists to promote this hatred of men by elitists. They get all kinds of help from BLM-racialists, GLTB-activists, and all the other scum in identity politics. But none of these groups actually represent any kind of grassroots movement of the people.

#MeToo will go down in political history as the most virulent & expensive astroturfing campaign ever. This entire campaign was paid for by the CIA Democrats, and their big-money political supporters including George Soros & Tom Steyer. These are the billionaire PAC supporters who are the equivalents of the Koch Brothers on the Republican side, which means they’re just as nasty. It’s not about partisanship, as much as it’s about class values.

Astroturfing means funding fake right-wing activist groups and paying shills to hold signs & chant slogans, as a political tactic to undercut legitimate grassroots movements. This photo below illustrates some of the finer points of astroturfing on the ground. It’s shot on location with all of its “supporters” bunched together.  Here, the photo is taken by someone in the crowd, implying “grassroots” in it’s style. It also lets a small group of people stand in a crowd of neutrals (or even unknowing opponents), and pose as a larger movement through trick photography. This is sophisticated bourgeois political science, in case you didn’t know.

Grassroots movements have real energy & popular support, and therefore take time to grow in becoming a political force. Socialism is the most-feared grassroots movement by elites. Astroturfing campaigns mysteriously & constantly pop-up like mushrooms in the media, and instantly become the rage. They seem to have unlimited funding, and are front page every day with their message. It’s always single-issue politics, framed in the crudest black or white perspectives. Google, Fakebook, YouTube, and the rest always give them a boost.

Latest astroturfing example from #MeToo: If you don’t believe Christine Blasey Ford, then you condone the abuse of women. Another astroturfing example: If you question the policies of Zionism, then you are an anti-Semite. These dirty tricks campaigns are the methods & language of fascism, and the Democrats have embraced it. Their problem is that the Republicans have been at it longer, and are better at it in many ways.

It used to be only the Republicans were seen as fascists, while the Democrats were the “adults in the room.” The Kavanaugh hearings have now moved the needle on that measure of political evolution, as the Democrats are exposed as outright liars who also use fascist methods of bullying & intimidation to win their cause. They can no longer claim to be morally superior to the Republicans, thanks to #MeToo– and that’s the real disaster here for Democrats. The average American voter needs to stop and ask themselves: What in any of this is in it for me? The answer is: Nothing. So my question is: Why are you supporting this, on either side?

There is no higher court in the land, and yet #MeToo Democrats insist that “believable” testimony, and hearsay with no corroborating evidence, should be the rule of law– over facts & rationality. I don’t believe anyone could build a worse legal case than the Democrats have, to oppose the confirmation of a Supreme Court Justice.

#MeToo is a sham & double-standard that is personified pathetically in these two press photos from the Kavanaugh hearings on Thursday. The first (above) is Hollywood actress Alyssa Milano about to enter the courtroom with her #MeToo entourage, before Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony. Milano has been a leading vitriolic voice in the reactionary #MeToo campaign, and this was to be a defining #MeToo moment, so she had to be there– I guess.

The second photo (above) is Alyssa Milano in the courtroom during the Kavanaugh hearings, representing #MeToo. As we can see, she dropped a few blouse buttons, but as we all know, it’s sexist for a man to look at (or comment on) her boobs these days– so I won’t, except that it’s the proverbial elephant in the room.

With everything the Democrats threw at Kavanaugh & the Republicans this past week, it’s still unlikely that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) will agree to delay the vote, which is on pace for Tuesday, October 2. That means that by the time the FBI has wrapped up its interviews, Kavanaugh will be through the Senate and ready to be confirmed by the House of Representatives for the Supreme Court.

By that time it will be evident to any objective observer that the #MeToo campaign is hopelessly reactionary, and impotent.  In the process of trying to assert itself as a political force, it has instead completely discredited itself in the eyes of the public. Anyone who calls #MeToo a “movement” at this point, is delusional or a political cynic. The only way forward for youth & working people in defending their democratic rights, is to reject this corrupt process entirely.

Update: Tue 02 Oct 2018 08:31:32 AM EDT

The Kavanaugh Hearings have been pushed into legal limbo, as the FBI conducts its supplemental pseudo-investigation of these phony sexual assault claims, per the bipartisan agreement last Friday engineered by Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz) & the Democrats. The Senate is split 51-49 for the Republicans, and there are two senators who are supposedly “on the fence,” Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) & Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine). Everyone else has committed along party lines.

By simply looking at the names & political affiliation of the “undecideds,” you can see their problem. Republicans expect them to vote with their party, while women expect them to join the Democrats in voting “No” on Kavanaugh. All the Republicans need is one of these two women senators to join them for a 50-50 tie, which can be decided by VP Mike Pence, who will vote “Yes” on Kavanaugh. Keep in mind, the GOP would prefer both these women senators to vote “Yes,” and avoid this kind of patriarchal mechanization, and that’s what all the fuss is currently about. This is American political theater at its worst, as everything has been scripted in advance, with nothing left to chance.

Recommended further reading:

Brett Kavanaugh & a Pause for the “Cos”

#MeToo’s House of Cards

Despicable Manipulation & Thievery

…………<>><>><><><>><>………….

Brett Kavanaugh & a Pause for the “Cos”

The Brett Kavanaugh hearings are a clear case of grandstanding politics by both parties, to distract people from real issues. The Democrats & their #MeToo crowd offer only hearsay & innuendo, in their accusations of sexual misconduct against Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court by Deborah Ramirez & Christine Blasey Ford.  Kavanaugh has denied everything, and no one can confirm anything, yet the New Yorker magazine published this political bombshell (written by feminists Ronan Farrow & Jane Mayer), as fact on September 23, so here we are.

 

Before these sensationalist headlines were splashed across every form of media known to mankind, no Democrats cared about Brett Kavanaugh’s resume. No one in the media made an issue of his anti-abortion, anti-democratic, pro-business & pro-torture stances. Those are matters that Americans deeply care about, yet they find no expression in this two-party sham called US politics. In this Orwellian world where 2+2=5,  Kavanaugh can only be attacked from the right, using the witch-hunting tactics of the #MeToo campaign. There is nothing progressive in any of this.

Even if the #MeToo Democrats “win” this Senate battle, it’s meaningless; as Trump will simply pick another reactionary judge from his list. Eventually one will be confirmed, securing a 5-4 right-wing majority on the Supreme Court. No one in the mainstream media cares to mention that. Overturning Roe v Wade is seen by Trump strategists as a key component to energizing their Christian fundamentalist base for 2020. As far as defending a woman’s right for access to safe abortion clinics, operated by competent professionals goes, the Democrats are silent in 2018.

Everything on the Trump side is about his ego & power, being able to bully his way through the process and not having to back down. Donald Trump always needs a media victory to feed his ego, otherwise he goes off the deep end, which isn’t viewed favorably by the Republican party– or anyone else.

As for “The Cos” (above), he should have been exposed & locked up long ago, and there are more than a few women in this sordid history of abuse that could have spoken out sooner, but were more concerned about their Hollywood careers. That’s a hard truth. That doesn’t excuse Bill Cosby’s sexual abuse, but it does explain how this was allowed to go on for so long, and sheds some light on the social responsibility for sexual predators.

If you are abused, and don’t come forward, others will suffer the same fate, and you will then bear some responsibility, as you could have done something to prevent it. No one volunteers to get raped, and that’s a heavy burden that remains with the abused victim. Casualties of rape too often remain silent due to their capitalist ethics, which deepens their victimization.

A rape victim can extend their torment by becoming a political tool of others, if they allow their abuse story to feed reactionary causes like #MeToo. What we see in the media over & over, are women who keep allowing themselves to be victimized. There is no actual healing or understanding going on with this #MeToo hate campaign. Only anger & backlash. All this is a reflection of the existential crisis of modern capitalism.

This filthy feminist spectacle has raised much awareness among the greater population, and their conclusions don’t match the official narrative. This is a major cause for concern among the ruling class, in that the #MeToo campaign may soon collapse upon itself, and the Democrats will be left naked– with no political cover. They have poured a vast amount of money & resources into this propaganda campaign, and are getting exactly the opposite results they intended. That’s a disaster by any definition.

This prison sentencing is a mixed-bag for the Democrats, as Bill Cosby was promoted as a “black intellectual” and role model for five decades, all-the-while being a serial rapist. The “black community” has lost one of it’s “leading representatives,” in a manner eerily similar to the OJ Simpson trial. Back then in 1995, a large number of black Americans sided with Simpson, even though the evidence was overwhelming that he was a double murderer, and that the trial was rigged. Twenty-some years down the road, Bill Cosby’s conviction for rape, and his sentence of 3-10 years in prison is seen as justice by most.

This hurts Black Lives Matter & the Democrats, who need these stooges to woo “their” brethren suffering black masses to vote for them. It’s hard to replace an icon of Cosby’s stature, as he had a powerful effect in anesthetizing the poor black ghettos & affluent mixed suburbs of America for decades with racialism and cynical calls for “personal responsibility.”

Conversely, this Cosby conviction is spun as a “win” for #MeToo, making it a “push” for the Democrats (which isn’t helpful for them), and that’s what this circus is all about. That’s why Cosby is sorta being pushed into the background, while the unconfirmed Brett Kavanaugh sexual abuse allegations are brought to the fore of American politics. It fits their needs, and these political phonies and media lapdogs have nothing else to discuss.

…………….<><><><>>………..

Reflections on a Music Career

I know the update I posted here was a shock to many fans. He is my explanation for those who truly supported the music, and therefore deserve one. The rest of you may follow along and hopefully you will learn something. The fact is I’ve been going down a dark road for a long time, in being this musical artist of such uncompromising intensity. It’s led to wonderful discoveries & revolutionary content, but it’s also isolated me.

When you burn for the truth in everything, you become intolerant of hypocrisy & lying behavior. The more I try to eliminate it in myself, the more I become disgusted & distanced from others who don’t understand. Artists are bold, restless, uncompromising & revolutionary by nature, and thus don’t do well with patience & temperance.

I’ve leaned on my best friend & collaborator Tom Pearce way too much over the years, because I had to. I won’t let that friendship (& what we’ve accomplished), end up turning into anger directed towards him– out of frustration. Those are the outside stresses that get internalized and refracted into art, and it’s done by real human beings, which means it takes an emotional toll.

People generally don’t think about art & artists too deeply, because they are busy living their lives, just trying to get by. In their free time they mostly seek escapism, instead of studying & learning. That’s how an artist becomes an outcast in a society where culture has been degraded, and it reaches a point where the artist has to make a decision. You either: 1) continue down that road, which leads to self-ruin; or 2) give it up and save yourself.

The truth is, I can’t continue to hold myself (& everyone else) to the artistic standards I’ve set. It gets to where it becomes too destructive. I think this is how jazz-bassist pioneer Jaco Pastorius felt at his end, and I didn’t want that for me. Even with this acceptance & understanding, it’s still an extremely difficult & emotional decision to quit your life’s passion.

As far as what was accomplished, here it is. Ric Size and his collaborators since 2011, through the music and the content on this site, have profoundly influenced music, art, society & politics on many levels, locally & globally. I’m confident Tom Pearce will soon find himself in-demand, as a webmaster, sound engineer & producer. Many others I have worked with over time have also benefited, and I wish them well. The truth is that Ric Size’s music is still too raw & intimidating for most people, and seen as extremely dangerous & provocative by the ruling class.

I’m the kind of person who excels at what I put my mind to, and I never tried harder or wanted anything to succeed more than this music. Now that it’s receding into the past, I see how impossible it all was. I’m definitely an optimist at heart, as I kept thinking I could find a breakthrough, right up to the end.

My final preoccupation as a musical artist was around security. Personal safety for me, my band mates, and the audience was going to be an issue. Ric Size is radioactive politically, and that can’t be separated from the performance. No matter what songs we were going to play, every event was going to have issues with Nazi’s & other right wing hates groups (Republican & Democrat backed), astroturfing our shows.

On top of that, there’s the lone wolf shooter that no one accounts for. This is Orlando where Christie Grimmie was killed after a live performance downtown. Of course, no one in Orlando will forget the Pulse nightclub massacre that happened only a few weeks after Grimmie’s slaying. Preventing these-type scenarios from happening at a Ric Size show was a dilemma that kept me awake at night for weeks. I wasn’t counting on any help from the local police of federal authorities, if you know what I mean. The only solution was to retire, as security was going to be a necessity, cost prohibitive, and in the end an impossibility.

At this stage I’m at peace with my decision, and feel much better. Relief, soothing away the disappointment is my best description. The money was never going to show, and TomP & I took it as far as we could. My initial goal when I came up with the concept of Ric Size over 20 years ago (before I met Tom), was to do it my way and change the world in the process. That mission has been accomplished, and now I happily work towards that objective as a blog writer. I’m still at it, just in an updated form for the times.

I still own a record label called Infinitelink Records, which owns the publishing & copyrights to all Ric Size music. That’s what you need to control and hold onto, boys & girls. Tom & I will work at finally getting everything packaged up & CD-formatted for your purchase online, at whatever pace events allow.

Thank you AGAIN to all our fans for your love & support!!

………….<><><><><><>…………

#MeToo’s House of Cards

House of Cards is a political thriller series created by Beau Willimon and released by Netflix. First released on February 1, 2013 House of Cards instantly became a “binge watching” hit, defining a new cinematic genre & home delivery method. It’s influence has been incalculable. It is impossible to understand House of Cards, without discussing Netflix. Founded in 1997, Netflix’s initial business model was DVD sales and rentals by mail. Netflix entered the content-production industry in 2012, and House of Cards soon became its flagship “Netflix Original” series. Today, Netflix is a multi-billion dollar conglomerate (Forbes: $141.9B), in part because of House of Cards.

Keep in mind that House of Cards is an adaptation of the 1990 BBC miniseries of the same name, and both are based the Michael Dobbs novel. The UK version of post-Thatcher England is very British, if you know what I mean. The stars are ugly & grotesque by design. It doesn’t have the delicious eye candy & sizzle of the US version. It’s still worthwhile viewing, as the power politics translate clearly, in the tradition of “civilized” England.

What makes the US version of House of Cards everyone’s favorite, is that it has something for everybody. This series has sex of all varieties, it has power politics & cat-fights, it has all sorts of behind-the-scenes maneuvering with insights that no other film or television series has ever delivered. House of Cards has a cast to dream about. Kevin Spacey as Frank Underwood is instantly innovative in talking directly to the audience concerning his personal feelings of contempt & disdain for us, and it becomes part of the rapture. We, the Audience are finally being let in on secrets that Washington insiders have kept hidden from the start.

We get more truth and political insight from a season of House of Cards, than years of interviews & political “analysis” from the likes of Larry King, Rachel Maddow, Anderson Cooper, Sean Hannity, etc. It’s part of this series’ subtle irony that these real life talking heads are often dismissively parodied as cameos. This show knows how to deliver a punch, which is another exciting element for viewers.

House of Cards wasn’t afraid to kill off important characters to teach its audience valuable political lessons. I’ll abbreviate by pointing out the talent that has been deceased in this series, and none by natural causes: Kate Mara as Zoe Barnes, Corey Stoll as Peter Russo, Sebastian Arcelus as Lucas Goodwin, Nathan Darrow as Edward Meechum, Rachel Brosnahan as Rachel Posner (favorite character), Paul Sparks as Thomas Yates, Neve Campbell as LeAnn Harvey (2nd favorite), Damian Young as Aidan Macallan, and now [!] Kevin Spacey as Frank Underwood. Those are all brilliant & unforgettable portraits of human striving and ambition gone wrong. Most series never come close to casting that level of talent, and that’s only what’s dead at the beginning of Season 6.

Most of the characters in this groundbreaking series should be considered as personifications of social types. One of the most remarkable features of House of Cards is its sweep in characters among the variegated social classes that inhabit Washington, DC. Most cinematic features which promise to reveal the mechanizations of power politics don’t have the time (or inclination) to highlight its impact on the broader population. Conversely, House of Cards illustrates the lives of political & business royalty, while also narrating the common people who serve & oppose them.

The young reporters trying to uncover & publish the truth are captured in great detail, as their influence is powerful. Sebastian Arcelus as Lucas Goodwin is a beautifully drawn-out example of the consequences of attempting to “out” those in power. Mozhan Marnò as Wall Street Telegraph reporter Ayla Sayyad is another example. Keep in mind, this is what is going on in real life with the persecutions of Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, Bradley/Chelsea Manning, and many, many others who are interested in revealing the truth in news.

Korey Jackson as Sean Jefferies (pic below) is an obscure example, as a young black reporter who isn’t brilliant, but is good at schmoozing elites & manipulative games. That gets him ahead in his work, but alienates him from his woman and respected colleagues. Real decisions & consequences; that’s what this series illustrates so well, on so many levels.

The creative bankruptcy of today’s “artist” is also personified brilliantly in this series, as Adam Galloway & Tom Yates are posers who get in WAY over their heads. When tragedy is revealed, we hardly feel badly for them, as they exist in a cynical world of hype & pretentiousness. For example in Season 1, a homeless man on the street teaches Claire more about art (origami) in an instant, than her clueless-but-sensitive photographer lover does in their entire relationship. A lot of viewers seem to have missed many of these subtleties.

Later in the series, Tom Yates is the dashing drinking companion who stole a dying friend’s written work to make himself a legend he can’t live up to. When Claire strikes in the end, we feel glad it’s over for him. We understand the killer and the victim. That’s a rare feat in cinematography, which takes extraordinary dedication & sensitive talent to pull off. I keep using that term cinematography because this series isn’t television, but it isn’t film either. It’s somewhere in-between. House of Cards is a phenomenon that created a whole new genre, and profoundly influenced the politics of its day which runs up to the present.

A revolutionary facet of this series is how fast it comes at you. If you’ve only watched this series once, then you don’t get it, because you are only understanding things on a superficial level. Such a viewer is merely following storylines for personal drama, and doesn’t absorb the meaning of this series. House of Cards is about personifying characters into political & social types that viewers can relate to, in order to reveal modern American politics. It’s the political lessons learned that count. If you’ve missed that, then you weren’t really watching or understanding what you saw. I estimate I’ve watched the 1st Season 7-8 times, the 2nd Season 4-5 times, and Seasons 3-5 three times each. I think I understand most of it by now, but there are still subliminal bits & pieces that elude me. That’s how artistically complex this series is.

If you watch closely, you will see elements of yourself in many different characters in this series. You will also see your enemies. Your enemies don’t like the fact that they’ve been exposed by this series. That’s why Senator Mark Warner (D-VA) testified last fall before the Intelligence Committee. Warner claimed (CNN image above) that Netflix’s House of Cards was a threat to “national security,” just a few days before the sexual assault allegations by burnout actor Anthony Rapp were leveled against Kevin Spacey through the media. Spacey has been a pariah ever since, and the series went on hiatus until a new season’s script was worked out.

That’s why #MeToo took down Kevin Spacey last October. It was to strangle this series into submission for its past sins against the establishment. For five seasons this series kept its audience up-to-date, revealing what goes on behind the curtain, in a riveting fictionalized narrative than mirrored current events. The writers for this series always paid attention to the news, and their storylines reflected this. That’s how this show managed to stay ahead of its audience and the censors– for five seasons at least.

House of Cards was always scheduled to go six seasons, and the belated final one arrives November 2, 2018– the Friday before the mid-term elections. House of Cards was always a political series that defined the times. This release date timing is proof positive of that– to be sure. As to the quality of the final eight episodes, we’ll see. The first five seasons ran 13 episodes, each 50+ minute length. The five deleted episodes this season represent the void left with Kevin Spacey’s dismissal.

Before this series is finally finished on November 2, it would serve us well to consider the balance sheet for #MeToo feminism in it’s first year on the job. It’s hard to believe it still hasn’t even been a year with this media-driven hysteria on sexual politics known as #MeToo. It feels like much longer. In this period, the most reactionary & vile elements of the political establishment have launched a false-flag hate campaign in the name of women against men. This is the sum of their political vision, the entire Democratic party’s populist “program” for November 6th, and beyond. Consider that as political food-for-thought while binge watching this series to the end.

House of Cards has been talked about extensively, yet it’s clear that many in the media don’t understand this series, or are hostile to its content. This fictionalized examination of the media, and how it is manipulated by power brokers has had an enormous impact on American political consciousness. House of Cards is the most artistic and lastingly relevant cinematography achievement that Hollywood/NYC has produced in this decade. That is why this show has been attacked by the reactionary #MeToo campaign and it’s hidden supporters.

House of Cards is entertaining because the people are so beautiful, the plots move in brilliant directions, and the dialogue is razor sharp. The drop-off begins at Season 3, as this series was expensive to produce and was repeatedly forced to yield to economic stresses & political mandates. Removing Kevin Spacey was one of them. Before that it was product placement, and even an outright ad for a new fertility drug by Robin Wright worked into a contrived scene where she’s consulting her physician on having a baby. As blatant and crass as that was, in many ways it rightfully belongs in the entirety, as it proves what paid for this series, and it wasn’t a $10/month subscription.

This series was always smart enough to predict the times and give itself room to maneuver into the next season. This final season of House of Cards will be a test of that resolve & ingenuity. If they’ve maintained their focus & hard-hitting style, then the show can rest in (relative) peace. But if Season 6 lags and turns into soapy dialogue for identity politics, then the #MeToo feminists can rightfully claim to have killed this series.

That is my greatest fear for House of Cards as the final season approaches. This series shouldn’t be turned into a political tool for the CIA Democrats, who are the political force behind the witch-hunt #MeToo campaign that removed Kevin Spacey from this series. This series is an artistic achievement with lasting cultural value. All the writers, directors, cast and crew from House of Cards represent a creative & intellectual triumph that should be celebrated & defended for its collective genius.

………….<><><><><><><>…………

Mallards 2

Mallards have their issues too, and here’s how they work them out. A quacky upstart gets the idea that she’s dominant, and challenges the existing dominant female to a duel.  It starts literally head-to-head, with each trying to uproot and submit the other.

They don’t bite, although they are fully capable, as this is a test of strength & brute force to determine dominance.

It quickly escalates & gets really quacky!! The chicks finally clear out (below) to avoid getting crushed.

The other ducks stand aside & witness, as feather fly when their wings are put into use, dueling for dominance!

Finally there is a submission, and everything is quickly back to normal, with no hard feelings as the alpha female takes her familiar place.

…………..<><><><><><><>…………..

Despicable Manipulation & Thievery

Congratulations to Japanese tennis phenom Naomi Osaka for winning the women’s US Open on the evening of September 8, 2018!!

It takes a thief to steal the joy of such a victory. Understand that Naomi Osaka had to apologize to the Flushing Meadows crowd for winning the US Open championship. Serena Williams still couldn’t leave it alone after that, and tried to ‘console’ her, after attempting every dirty trick she could think of, to steal the championship from Osaka.

I have come to the conclusion that this was the worst meltdown & display of poor sportsmanship in modern tennis history. Serena Williams was going to lose (uneventfully) to Naomi Osaka, so she decided to ruin it for everyone– out of jealousy. Serena Williams was in complete control of her manipulative actions, as she 1) lied about not being coached after the 1st violation, 2) manipulatively claimed she didn’t know it was her second violation after the racket abuse, then 3) tried to bring in handlers to “fix” things after the third violation. She then played the victim in front of a partisan NYC crowd, and into ESPN’s cameras as millions watched in disbelief. It’s to Naomi Osaka’s credit that she wasn’t rattled by all this chaos Williams created, and closed her out moments later for the US Open title.

It was a despicable performance all around by Serena Williams, who threatened the chair umpire, when she said to him, “you will never work on my court again.” All this after lying about not being coached (and escalating her fury), when her coach already admitted (on TV) that he had been coaching her. Then she accused the chair umpire of sexism, which makes no sense and demands an explanation. Serena Williams’ opponent was a woman– Naomi Osaka. At least until Williams dragged the chair umpire into the match.

Williams also played the “mother” card, and at that point the astute viewer gets a sickening sense that this tantrum is a calculated performance from someone who wants to win at all costs, yet knows she’s defeated in a fair match, so she pulls this crap. After the match Serena Williams refused to shake hands with chair umpire Carlos Ramos, who acted as honorably & professionally as anyone could expect, after being berated & baited by a professional manipulator in front of a world audience.

Serena Williams dragged a respected chair umpire ( a neutral) into the narrative, in an attempt to take away (or at least taint) Naomi Osaka’s victory. Tennis is a game of skill, power & etiquette– with simple rules & a strict code-of-conduct which every player knows– so ignorance is not an excuse.

Players can’t be coached during the match, and if the umpire sees it- then you are warned. Serena Williams got busted, then ingeniously denied it, and then used it as an excuse to blame someone else for her losing. That’s just disgraceful, and that’s what tennis fans are saying. Over 3 million people have viewed this video (above) as of this publication, just over 24 hours since the match ended. The comments are overwhelmingly negative towards Serena Williams, and even her hardcore fans are finding it hard to defend her, as they are getting shouted down with conviction, and in numbers.

A very subtle point that serious tennis fans noticed was that Serena Williams’ second violation for racket abuse came after she had been broken (3-2 Osaka in the second set). This meant the umpire had to award Naomi Osaka a point to start her next service game. Serena Williams wasn’t going to break Osaka back at that point, so she tried “gamesmanship” instead. Williams insanely tried to insist the chair umpire ‘take back’ the 1st violation for coaching, so she would not be penalized a point. Of course, that’s an impossibility, but Serena still acted this out, trying to make the umpire look bad while escalating the rhetoric to incite the crowd. The cameras were rolling, and the audience & crowd heard everything. It was cringe-worthy.

Serena Williams’ third violation meant a game penalty (by rule), which she was completely aware of, and conveniently picked the next changeover (with Osaka serving at 4-3) to start up with the chair umpire again. This was nothing less than verbal abuse towards a neutral party, in a blatant attempt to bully & manipulate, to provide a smokescreen for her own failures and inability to gracefully accept defeat. It is remarkable that Serena Williams is at the end of her career, and she still hasn’t learned this basic courtesy and gesture of respect towards others.

Tennis fans have seen this before from Serena Williams, and are ready for it. “Roid rage” is a comment repeated over & over, as it’s getting harder & harder for her fans to deny this possibility. We may be having our OJ Simpson/Bill Cosby moment here with Serena Williams, as her behavior is proving her to be something other than what she’s promoting.

ESPN incessantly ran commercials (example above) during the US Open, featuring Serena Williams as a mother & role model for women. That narrative is being challenged by real life events that paint a different picture. The word I keep using in writing about Serena Williams is manipulation. This is going on at every level, personal, professional and corporate media, as Serena is political & has coat tails. She strongly appeals to feminists & racialist African Americans– a significant voting block for the Democrats. As long as she is winning, these groups will believe in her and do what she says, which is, “vote Democrat.”  Midterms are just two months away.

Below is a screenshot from Real Clear Politics, which archived two Serena Williams’ articles on September 9th: one from a Washington Post Democrat in her defense, and one attack piece from a Republican, who somewhat convincingly compares her to Hillary Clinton. This clearly shows she’s political, in case you weren’t convinced already.

If she falls like OJ or the “Cos,” then this block dissipates into disillusion & disaffection. That can lead to radicalization, which is the last thing the Democrats want. Better to keep feminists & racialists deceived & under control, and Serena Williams is consciously part of this campaign which has deep pockets & political roots. She is being very well-paid by the puppet-masters for her services.

ESPN is still in her corner (of course), as they are partners with Williams to the bitter end. As mentioned, she ties in closely with #MeToo feminism & Black Lives Matter racialism, so she has clout– for sure. These witch hunt campaigns which she personifies, define the liberal left wing of today’s Democratic party, which is controlled by the “moderate” (right wing) faction– known as the CIA Democrats. Senator Mark Warner (D– Va), Barack Obama & Serena Williams have a lot more in common than you might think.

After her meltdown & defeat, ESPN flooded their morning tennis news feed on September 9th with Serena Williams features, glossing over Naomi Osaka’s 6-2, 6-4 victory.

These are the first 4 screenshots going down their page– all featuring Williams.

As we can see, Naomi Osaka hardly matters to ESPN.

That media blitz has backfired (hello!), as this tantrum was too ugly, so ESPN has retreated to her “sexism’ claim towards the chair umpire; and the supposed need to change the coaching rules. ESPN changed their headlines on Serena by nightfall, after Novak Djokovic won the men’s US Open championship.

When you call any official a “liar” and a “thief” (in any sport), you will get sanctioned. This phony outrage by Williams, ESPN, the WTA, and other pro-feminist groups is calculated & despicable. Only in this Bizarro world of modern capitalist politics can a male umpire (who is only trying to do his job), be accused of sexism by an abusive superstar female athlete, and have it get traction in the fake media. Has anyone in the US media asked Naomi Osaka what she thinks of all this, or does only Serena’s opinion count?

You see, because the cheating coach and his washed-up protoge don’t like the rules, they need to be changed “for the good of the game.”  If these rules had already been changed, then Serena might have won, and that’s all that matters. If it hadn’t been for the male umpire’s “sexism,” the match would have been more “fair.” That’s the message, and it’s impossible to miss–unless you willfully blind yourself. Got that?

Final Update: Tuesday 9/11/2018  ~ 11:00 AM ET

This infamous Serena Williams’ 2009 incident at the US Open finals was against Kim Cljisters. Williams was called for a foot fault on her second serve by a lineswoman, making it match point at 15-40. There was no camera angle that definitively proved the call– one way or the other. Serena had lost the first set, and this was in the second set at 5-6. Serena (who already had a code violation) exploded, and was then was called for the verbal abuse violation, for threatening to “stuff this ball down her throat,” which defaulted the match. Cljisters was a former grand slam champion who had just come back from having a baby, but ESPN & the rest didn’t think her being a new mother was as a big story at the time.

Tiger Woods had his life destroyed when then-wife took a golf club to his SUV, as he came home late from another fling. He was branded a “cheater,” and lost all his endorsements. Tiger had to comeback and work to regain some of those sponsors. That was a private life affair, and really no one else’s business– outside of them and their family. This US Open tantrum was seen by all audiences, and it definitely wasn’t “children safe” viewing, yet no one dares raise the possibility that she should lose her Nike sponsorship, or any others. This shows you how highly-up she’s protected, as an asset for manipulation. We as fans need to be smarter, because we’re a whole lot better than this. Serena Williams is presented to America & the world as the best we have to offer, when in reality she’s corrupt to the core. Just like capitalism, she 1) has no ethics, and 2) does whatever is necessary to maintain her dominance. Serena is not a real person, she’s a persona, which can be flexible and molded to fit a variety of forms. But none of them are stable or healthy.

In summary, this is by far the most disgraceful player incident in tennis history, at least since television has been broadcasting matches. Nothing that Ilie Năstase, Jimmy Connors, John McEnroe, Marcos Baghdatis or even Nick Kyrgios can come close to this nastiness from Serena Williams. The worst of it is, is that it still continues. Everyone else calms down & apologizes, or at least yields. But there has been no apology, or anything close, from Serena Williams. Serena and her political & corporate advisors never apologize. They only lie, manipulate and bully to get their way. And when things go South, they employ an army of flunky proxies to do their dirty work in the media & online– while they scurry off into hiding like cockroaches running from the light. Little boys & girls pretending to be adult men & women; is there anything more sick & dangerous?

Seventeen years ago today, a really bad thing happened. The whole world saw the images of the Trade Towers collapsing in NYC, and we were all told the story to believe. Since then, a lot more truth has come to light, and most people feel much differently since that Tuesday (it felt like a Tuesday), September 11, 2001 when we were “shocked & awed.” Serena Williams has used these same methods & tactics in her career, and it has led to 23 WTA grand slams, which is a lot of winning. But what has been the cost? When she began, joining her sister Venus, she was a phenom that any open-minded person loved. She shattered stereotypes, and gave American black women something to be proud of. But the problem of this lies in the nationalism & identity politics, which is reactionary in nature.

Serena has metamorphosed herself since she broke into professional tennis in October, 1995. The second half of her career has been marred by TUE’s (exemptions for PED use), along with unending allegations of illicit doping. Her constant complaints on social media (and through the lapdog sports media) about being tested are just another manipulation to play herself as the victim, when she’s the liar & (most likely) a cheater too. The WADA will retain all her blood & urine samples. Someday, a test will be developed to detect whatever new performance-enhancing substance she has been using. Then the scientific & medical proof will be irrefutable, and at that time I completely expect Serena Williams and her camp to deny everything as a sexist/racist attack on her character & career.

Further Reading;

The Politics of Motherhood in Sports

The World Cup & Sports Propaganda

Beauty, Athletics & Revolution

………….<><><><><>><>……….

The Ric Size Trio: Coming Soon!!

Early rehearsals have been promising. It’s so nice to work with true professionals.

We’re getting the band together. The Ric Size Trio is: Bill Pelick on bass & Tom Pearce on drums.

Above is the set list we’re working though, to figure out what works– and what doesn’t.

Look for us soon in Orlando & (hopefully) beyond!!

Update: Sunday September 23, 2018

Bass player Bill Pelick has left this project after two rehearsals. It turns out he prefers to play classic rock, and he’s also not up for touring. We are all still friends and wish him the best.

This has been the story of my music career. This trio was intended to be the “reunion tour,” where we played the fun songs and rocked everybody– for the money. One thing I’ve learned in my life is that I”m not allowed to be successful in business. Something always “happens” to prevent it, despite my best efforts & the demand I create. This “something” is establishment fear, which has been spread far, wide & deep by nefarious monied interests & the deep state. These entities do have the power to keep this band from happening, and they’ve done everything possible to see that it doesn’t.

I’ve been at this music career for over 20 years, and it gets to the point where you know you can’t win, or be happy, so the best option is to move on. If there was a bass player who was capable & willing to join us, they would have shown themselves by now. I don’t envision any more Ric Size performances in the future. I’ve had it with playing solo, which I was always forced into– due to lack of support. The truth is, my music & politics are so far “out there,” that most musicians can’t relate. Those who try are soon scared off. This is how it goes when you are a blacklisted artist.

The only true artist I worked with in my music career is Tom Pearce. Tom is a consummate professional, and an inventive drummer with perfect time. He’s also a sound specialist, producer, & webmaster. Tom Pearce is the only one who truly has what it takes to rock with me. For the rest who helped, then hopped off, I have mixed feelings. I’m grateful for any assistance, yet disappointed that fear & prejudice limited their willingness to collaborate. It’s a waste of talent, IMO.

Me, I have no regrets, as I gave it everything I had with no fear. When you’re spent, it’s time to do something else, and that appears to be the case here. We will do our best to finish re-mastering & releasing all the albums. Once again, it’s invisible barriers that have kept us from making these products available on CD, as censorship & blacklisting have cut this music off from a mainstream audience. It’s pointless to put time, money & energy into producing & manufacturing product, only to be choked off by Google, Fakebook, YouTube, PayPal and everyone else who controls the important levers of power. An artist needs promotion, publicity & distribution to succeed, and I’ve got none of that. It’s not from a lack of effort.

The upshot is that everything I’ve ever written on politics has had a direct (negative) impact of my music career– from a financial standpoint. I can no longer do this for free, as I’ve run out of money. I’m also unwilling to remain isolated, which is what the establishment does to artists it deems as dangerous. This is why I’m alone. Don’t believe the girl or woman who says she desires a man who is artistic. If that was the case, I would have been hooked-up & satisfied a long time ago. Women are taught to go for the money & security, which is the exact opposite of being a true artist.

……….<><><><><><>……….

TV’s Transcendent Phenomenon: Charlie’s Angels

What is television really? It’s vicarious escapism. The never-changing narrative with TV is that you’ve had a hard day at work/home/school, and you want to relax and de-stress. Anything that engages and allows the viewer to live out their deepest fantasies becomes a ratings & cultural hit. These shows define the times, because everyone watches them– and is thus affected.

The biggest television phenomenon EVER, happened in 1976, when ABC’s Charlie’s Angels piloted. Here it is, and everyone from that era has seen it.

Charlie’s Angel’s were the Beatles of television– breaking rules & changing everything with their presence & charisma. This was the first prime-time network show that featured all women as the leads. There were no men (only Bosley) to save them, so they saved each other, which was an important motif. It liberated women, in that this show wasn’t about the writing or the message in the script– this was about women owning it.

Charlie’s Angels was billed as three women police officers, hired to be a detective firm for the rich & eccentric “Charlie,” who is only heard and voiced by John Forsythe. Note that there is never any real danger of them getting hurt or shot. You just don’t do that to Charlie’s Angels, and that was another message to the bad guys, which the audience liked.

Farrah Fawcett-Majors was (and still is) the first Angel everyone talks about. To put it simply: she had charisma like no other bombshell you’ll ever see. Her smile was radiant & irresistible, plus she liked to have fun. It wasn’t difficult to write for her, because she easily did everything a female star needs to do. She instantly turned on all the men, which means all the other women had to up their games. That got everyone’s attention, and Charlie’s Angels instantly became the #1 show of the 1976 season, opening up new frontiers in television.

This was America’s bicentennial, when a peanut farmer from Georgia, Jimmy Carter (D) was elected US President, ending 8 years of Nixon-Kissinger-Ford corruption & war criminality. Vietnam was finally over, and Charlie’s Angels was the perfect show for its time, as it radiated optimism.

Basic cable completely penetrated America by the early-mid 1980’s. It’s basic channels in most markets were: MTV, CNN, WGN, TBS, TNT, ESPN, USA, A&E & Lifetime. In many ways Charlie’s Angels was a prequel to cable channels such as MTV and Lifetime. Many of the early made-for-television movies on Lifetime featured ex-Angels in leading roles. Music videos had to look good and have beautiful women to appeal to kids. That was Charlie’s Angels, and there was nothing like it before them.

This one-hour “action” phenomenon ran five seasons (1976-81)– 110 episodes. The only Angel who stayed the entire series was Jaclyn Smith, who personified feminine elegance & sophistication. She dressed impeccably, looking stunning in everything from formal wear to a bikini. Smith had done commercials & modeling before Charlie’s Angels, so she was a limited actress at the time, but she made up for her lack of chops with guile & charm. This series is unthinkable without Jaclyn Smith’s presence, and (again) that tells you what this is all about– the women.

Example: one early episode has Jaclyn Smith as Kelly Garret, going undercover to get a part in a casting. Her pitch to the local Hollywood director, who is ridiculously dressed as a South Pacific native (this is what they did to men) is as follows:

Kelly Garrett: I acted some in high school, and in college… and I never get parking tickets.

Director: What does parking tickets have to do with this?

Kelly Garrett: Well, whenever the police pull me over, I begin crying.  

[end of scene]

The second-longest running Angel was Cheryl Ladd, who replaced Farrah Fawcett after season 1, and stayed to the end. Farrah Fawcett wanted to do movies, and she had the clout to get out of her TV deal with ABC. Ladd was introduced to the audience as Farrah’s sister at the beginning of season 2, and she did well enough in her role.

Cheryl Ladd was put in an impossible situation of replacing an icon, and to her credit didn’t try, but instead was herself. Ladd is beautiful & looked fantastic in a bikini, which was often her featured part, as she lacked acting skills. Cheryl Ladd was a model & disco dancer, also billed as a singer, although she couldn’t sing a note. She made several disco albums in the late 1970’s during her time with Charlie’s Angels, and they all stiffed.

On Charlie’s Angel’s, Ladd’s sometimes questionable fashion sense clashed with Jaclyn Smith, who always had an intuitive sense of style & good taste. In contrast, Cheryl Ladd often wore disco-dated sequins and the rest of that garb. I’ve been a little rough on this Angel, and I really don’t mean to be; Cheryl Ladd was (by far) the best replacement Angel, and she did her part to keep the series going.

The last original Angel (and most people mention them in this order) was Kate Jackson, who was billed as the “smart one,” who could act. This came through very clearly, as many of the best episodes of this series featured her carrying the plot with her versatility & humanity. In Charlie’s Angels, Kate Jackson personified the intelligent & understated form of feminine beauty. She wore turtleneck sweaters & tailored slacks, while Farrah & Jaclyn dazzled with cutting edge blouses & bathing suits.

There’s an instinctive male ritual that goes with this show (and it was from the start), which is that you have to pick your favorite Angel. I always qualify this by stating that I could never say “no” to any of them, but as a one-woman-at-a-time kind of guy, I’ve always preferred Kate Jackson. Every guy does this, and they’re always serious in their answer. There’s a tip for all the women readers: ask the “favorite Angel” question to measure his preferences. If he’s straight, he won’t lie.

Kate Jackson left after season 3, which was the correct time for her to go. The producers & casting directors for Charlie’s Angels could never replace Kate Jackson, as the last two seasons are mostly unwatchable. But for three seasons, Charlie’s Angels was a mesmerizing mixture, in that it empowered women and awestruck men. Boys/men wanted them, and girls/women wanted to be able to do that to boys & men. There is nothing else, and that’s why Charlie’s Angel’s owned it back then, and still does today. No new TV show, or movie remake, can ever re-capture all that primal magic.

Charlie’s Angels was (and still is) distorted & misrepresented to fit a particular Hollywood agenda, which today is #MeToo. Back then it was slammed as Jiggle TV or TNA– tits-n-ass. As discussed and shown above in the videos, it was much more than that– yet this unfair label still stuck. Why? It’s because this show was hated by a segment of the political spectrum known as feminists. These haters fumed when Farrah Fawcett walked in front of the camera with her blouse jiggling, obviously not wearing a bra. This was liberating for many girls & women at the time, and the boys & guys certainly didn’t protest; yet much of this was (and still is) represented as degenerate & degrading to women.

Note that it was Farrah’s idea to do stuff like this. She smiled & liked it, and viewers loved her. Everyone bought “the poster,” or at least got a peek at it from a friend. She got paid and no one was hurt, so what was all the fuss? The only demographic that was actually offended were older women, who felt unattractive & left behind by this fantasy TV fare.

The truth was (and always will be), beautiful younger women are ALWAYS more attractive to men than older women. Charlie’s Angels proved this as an undeniable fact to everyone who watched. As a boy who watched back in the day, my feelings were similar then to how I feel today, in that women need to take care of their men, otherwise they will get left behind. The message to boys & men was and still is: these are the most beautiful women, desired by all, so they will be doing the choosing. The only way you can get a woman of this quality, is if you are just as desirable as a man. All this is natural & instinctive, so why do feminists label it as sexist & unfair to women?

…………..<><><><><><>………..