HLN: Showbiz Tonight- Countdown: 'Best Burnett Ever!'

Source:HLN- The Carol Burnett Show, on HLN's Showbiz Tonight.

"The cast of the "Carol Burnett Show" including Burnett herself countdown the show's best moments on Showbiz Tonight."

Source: HLN Showbiz Tonight 

One of the best variety comedy shows of all-time, sort of like a half-hour Saturday Night Live. Speaking of SNL: SNL gets a lot of credit for being such an original variety skit-comedy show that other shows have tried to follow and make their own versions of it. And all of that is true, but Carol Burnett, was essentially the same thing, but came out 6-7 years earlier in the late 1960s, instead of 1975 with SNL and was on CBS instead of NBC.

You could make a case that Carol Burnett herself and her show with his her great cast and writers, inspired shows like Saturday Night Live and later In Living Color, MADD-TV and other skit comedy shows. Because of how good it was, how original it was, the topics it covered. That it wasn’t about sending a political, or cultural message, but about making fun of everyday American life.

The Carol Burnett Show, covered and had everything and they weren’t about politics at least in the sense they were trying to push some political message. It was simply about entertainment and what was going on in America at the time especially as it related to pop culture. And always looking for the funny side of everything they covered.

The CBS mad fun of politicians, movies, TV shows, actors, musicians, weren’t worried about political correctness and pleasing everybody. But great comedians who all had similar sense of humors, great chemistry, who liked each other loved working with each other. And in that sense at least it reminds me of Seinfeld and was better than Saturday Night Live, that generally looks at politics from a political slant. Carol Burnett, was simply about making people laugh and doing it in a classy way and having a great time at it. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

You can also see this post at The Daily Review, on Blogger.

You can also see this post at FreeState MD, on Blogger. 

You can also see this post at FreeState MD, on WordPress.

Suzanne Somers: 'On Leaving The Role of Chrissy On Three's Company'

Source:Foundation Interviews- actress/comedian Susanne Somers on why she was kicked off of ABC's Three's Company.

"Suzanne Somers on leaving the role of "Chrissy" on Three's Company - EMMYTVLEGENDS.ORG" 

From Foundation Interviews

Suzanne Somers blew a big opportunity by leaving or putting herself in position to get fired by ABC. Because her acting career would've probably taken off from there, being on such a hot show, that probably would've led to other opportunities, that would've made the money and then some from what she was looking for from at ABC.

Lynn Stuart Parramore: 'Are You Ready For a Post Masculine World?'

Source:AlterNet- columnist Lynn Stuart Parramore.

"The sun began to set on traditional masculinity over 500 years ago – just around the time musketeers arrived on the battlefields of Europe. At first, the feudal knights scoffed. How unnatural, and worse, how unmanly to go around pointing ungainly, smoke-belching sticks at your enemies!

But soon enough, technology won out, and it was the knights who faded into obsolescence. Poets pined for the old masculinity, but the days when the brawniest ruled the land were numbered. Brains now counted. So did the ability to adapt to new technologies. Just ask Elizabeth I."

From the AlterNet 

“There are a few things that happen when you attempt to travel the streets of New York with a bright yellow book that screams The End of Men under your arm. First, you get a lot of inquisitive stares. Some people snicker. When you accidentally leave the book on the counter of your morning coffee shop, the man who returns it to you points to the cover, giggles, and does a little jig.

But if you are the author of a book called The End of Men—with a man for a husband and a boy for a child—you get sticky notes left on your bedroom door. “My 6-year-old, to whom the book is dedicated, writes things like, ‘Only bullies write books called The End of Men,’” says author Hanna Rosin, whose 2010 Atlantic essay turned 310-page book hit stands this week. She clarifies: “He’s learning about bullying in school.”

Source:The Daily Beast- "It's not the end of men - but they're in trouble." From Hanna Rosin.

From The Daily Beast

“Are we seeing an end of men and a rise of women? In our guest spot today Hanna Rosin author of The End of Men: And the Rise of Women, points out that women are no longer gaining on men they have pulled ahead of them. In her book she investigates the shifting power dynamics between men and women throughout every level of society and the implications it has on life events.

Check out an excerpt from The End of Men: And the Rise of Women and be sure to tune in at 3:40pm for the full conversation.

“Award-winning journalist Hanna Rosin argues that the transitional economy is ushering in a new era in gender relations, and explores how both men and women can adapt to our rapidly changing social and cultural dynamics.”

Source:NBC News- Hanna Rosin's book.

From NBC News

"Award-winning journalist Hanna Rosin argues that the transitional economy is ushering in a new era in gender relations, and explores how both men and women can adapt to our rapidly changing social and cultural dynamics." 

Source:The RSA- Author Hana Rosin, talking about her book. 

From The RSA

Warning: this article could be construed as politically incorrect by oversensitive tight asses. Actually, it probably will be.

Men, who needs them? A Far-Left pipe dream where men are not even welcome, or where masculinity disappears, or where all men are essentially gay. I find it ironic that people on the Far-Left who are so anti-male man-haters, tend to be somewhat dykish even and have masculine characteristics themselves. Even though they claim to be anti-masculinity. They see football, boxing, interest in cars, tools, gambling, checking out attractive women, and I could go on, but I have other things I would like to accomplish in my life, but they see all of these activities as somehow sexist. Even though a lot of American women, straight even, like football, boxing, cars, tools, gambling, etc and are some of the most feminine, beautiful and sexy women you’ll ever see.

It is not so much masculinity that the man-hating sexist Far-Left doesn’t like. Well, they don’t like masculinity, but it’s male masculinity and male heterosexuality that they don’t like. But if women are a Dyke, no problem, because she’s just being who she was born as. According to Socialists on the Far-Left who don’t like masculinity when it comes from straight men. 

You’ll never see straight men, or women who are to the right of Socialists, (democratic or otherwise) which is only most of the world, try to put down female femininity. Because we love women, especially straight women. At least coming from a straight man. We love who they are and how versatile that they are. That they’re cute, beautiful, well-built, funny, but they’ll also stand up for themselves and watch sports with the guys.

There are straight women who like sports and there are straight men such as myself, who like soap operas. If they’re funny, well-written, well-done and seem to have some broader point other than: "Who is Jake going to stab in the back now." Or whoever the character is. Without straight men and yes we tend to be masculine which is a common characteristic about straight men and something that straight women tend to like about us, we would have a country of gay men and overly adorable and feminine straight women who never grow up. We would be a national day care center and kindergarten class. With no one to fix the cars when they break down, police the streets, defend the country and so-forth. Because all the men would be makeup artists, or clothing designers. Well, I guess the dykes could handle the male responsibilities. It would be a strange universe where everyone who enters who use to live on Planet Earth would think they drank too much, or got too high the night before.

You can also see this post on WordPress.

You can also see this post at The Daily Review, on Blogger. 

You can also see this post at The Daily Review, on WordPress.

You can also see this post at FreeState MD, on WordPress.

You can also see this post at FreeState MD, on Blogger.

MLB Productions: MLB 1961- World Series Game 5- New York Yankees @ Cincinnati Reds: Highlights

Source:MLB Productions- welcome to Cincinnati's Crosley Field.

"1961 World Series Game 5: Yankees @ Reds" 

From Baseball Ruski

You can see why the New York Yankees were called the Bronx Bombers during this era. I mean they have Mickey Mantle, Roger Maris, when Maris was still a deadly power hitter, and Elston Howard (to name a few) all in the same lineup. A very difficult team to pitch to, especially in a small ballpark like Crosley Field in Cincinnati. The Cincinnati Reds really needed a great game from their starting pitcher to have any shot at beating the Yankees, even at their home ballpark, which they simply didn't get. And the Reds threw batting practice instead losing this game 13-5.

Brave New Foundation: 'Law & Disorder- How the System Really Works'

Source: Brave New Foundation- actor Dennis Farina, when he was on seasons 15-16 of Law & Order. RIP

"On Law & Order, everything makes sense: the police chase after violent bad guys, the accused get a fair trial, and justice is blind. But is that the reality in the United States? Watch this video to have your mind blown about how unjust our system truly is.

Produced with the partnership of the American Civil Liberties Union, Constitution Project, and National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers."

From Brave New Foundation

A lot of these law enforcement shows about the justice system, all though most of them are entertaining, only focus on a small percentage of the crimes. But again we are talking about entertainment here. Who would want to watch a show that’s about shoplifting, or traffic stops, drunk driving an so-forth. People need to be able to differentiate between reality and entertainment and many times they are not the same thing. But even if the law enforcement shows showed the criminal justice system for what it is that it a lot about drug crimes and drug offenders and that a lot of these supposed crimes happen in African-American communities in urban areas, these shows would be accused of racism. For always highlighting young African-American men as suspects and criminals.

If these law enforcement shows showed the criminal justice system for what it really is, that it is basically about low-level felonies like shoplifting and misdemeanors, who would watch? Again I get back to the entertainment factor here. A lot of these shows as far as the crimes and how the detectives and prosecutors do their jobs even though they aren’t completely accurate, are at least realistic. As professionals in the criminal justice system will tell you. And even though they do tend to concentrate on a low percentage of crimes that are committed in America, they tend to do a good and accurate job. And they are realistic in the sense that crimes in America are committed by all Americans as far as ethnicity and race. And they don’t focus on one racial, or ethnic group in America.

Again to go back to Hollywood and reality it’s not the job of Hollywood to show exactly what life if like and the subjects that they cover. There job is to be entertaining and hopefully realistic. Smart viewers want both, but unfortunately for lot of Americans they simply want to be entertained when they are watching TV. And even if these shows don’t show the criminal justice system for exactly what it is, again its Hollywood and if you’re a smart person you’re going to anyway how realistic the show is anyway by how informed you are about how the country works. And how much you know about current affairs in America including criminal justice, or whatever the issue is.  

You can also see this post on WordPress.

You can also see this post at The Daily Review, on Blogger.

You can also see this post at FreeState MD, on Blogger. 

You can also see this post at FreeState MD, on WordPress.

CBS News: Mike Wallace: ‘The Homosexuals (1967)’

Source:CBS News- A 1967 CBS News documentary-

”It’s been nearly 50 years since CBS News first took on the subject of gay rights. It was in a documentary. You’ll recognize the host, Mike Wallace, but you won’t recognize your country.

“Most Americans are repelled by the mere notion of homosexuality,” reported Wallace in the documentary. “A CBS poll shows two out of three Americans look on homosexuality with disgust, discomfort, or fear.”

The year was 1967 and whoever named the program cut straight to the chase: “CBS Reports: The Homesexuals.”

From CBS News 

“The Homosexuals” is a 1967 episode of the documentary television series CBS Reports. The hour-long broadcast featured a discussion of a number of topics related to homosexuality and homosexuals. Mike Wallace anchored the episode, which aired on March 7, 1967. Although this was the first network documentary dealing with the topic of homosexuality, it was not the first televised in the United States. That was The Rejected, produced and aired in 1961 on KQED, a public television station out of San Francisco.Three years in the making, “The Homosexuals” went through two producers and multiple revisions. The episode included interviews with several gay men, psychiatrists, legal experts and cultural critics, interspersed with footage of a gay bar and a police sex sting. “The Homosexuals” garnered mixed critical response.”

Source:Kim Smythe- 1967 CBS News documentary about homosexuality.

From Kim Smythe 

“Veteran journalist Mike Wallace, who died Saturday at age 93, had many claims to fame and one credit that might be considered a claim to infamy — his participation in the sensationalistic 1960s documentary The Homosexuals.

Wallace would later express regret about the tone of the documentary, which aired only once, March 7, 1967, on CBS. Hosted and narrated by Wallace, it characterized gay men as promiscuous and lonely, given to fleeting, anonymous sexual encounters. It acknowledged the discrimination they faced, but with “no sense of righteous indignation” about that, the journal Film Threat once noted. The program largely ignored lesbians. Still, it marked a breakthrough in gay visibility on television.

“Years after the broadcast, Mike Wallace would admit regret that The Homosexuals was not more balanced and sympathetic in its focus,” according to the Film Threat article. “In 1995, Wallace made a surprise appearance at New York’s Lighthouse Cinema, which was showing The Homosexuals as part of a Gay Pride line-up. The audience treated Wallace with deep respect and the veteran newsman hosted an impromptu Q&A session after the film was screened.”

Source:The Advocate- from Mike Wallace's 1967 documentary about homosexuality.

From The Advocate

If you look at this documentary especially by the standards and culture of today, Mike Wallace’s 1967 documentary about homosexuality looks very homophobic. It wouldn’t be made today at least the way it was written and the people that were interviewed, especially Christian-Right folks who think that homosexuality should be a crime and we should go back to Beaver Cleaver’s and Ozzie and Harriet’s 1950s America. And the Far-Left political correctness movement would beat the hell out it talking about how bigoted the documentary is.

But to state the obvious: 1967 is not 2012. The view that homosexuality was a crime and a sin was actually mainstream even in the late 1960s. And if you had no issues with gays and homosexuality back then and believed gays should be treated equally as straights, you would be considered a radical back then.

In my personal opinion and I believe I’m part of a solid majority today in 2012, gays are entitled to the same legal and constitutional rights and responsibilities as straights, just as I believe that ethnic and racial minorities have the same rights and responsibilities as European-Americans and even Anglo-Saxons. But if I was around in 1967 with those same views, I would be the radical. And people who are considered Far-Rightists today, would be part of the mainstream when it comes to American public opinion and culture.

You can also see this post on WordPress. 

You can also see this post at FreeState MD, on WordPress.

You can also see this post at FreeState MD, on Blogger.

CBS News: See It Now- Edward R. Murrow vs Senator Joseph R. McCarthy

Source: CBS News- See it Now, with Edward R. Murrow. 

"Edward R. Murrow vs. Senator Joe McCarthy. Originally from CBS News's See it Now, but the video has since been deleted or blocked on YouTube. 

"On a wall of Joseph McCarthy's Senate office there used to hang a framed quotation. its author unknown!

“Oh, God, don't let me weaken. Help me to continue on. And when I go down, let me go down like an oak tree felled by a woodsman's ax.

In its March 8, 1954, cover story. Time magazine took note of that prophetic inscription as it profiled the junior Senator from Wisconsin, then at the very height of his political power. For four years he had terrorized the nation with his wild and exaggerated charges that nearly every branch of the Government had been infiltrated by Communists and fellow travelers who were busily doing the Soviet Union's dirty work. In the cold‐war climate of fear that the Senator was exploiting and exacerbating, the careers of many eminent men and women were being destroyed on the basis of hearsay evidence — or no evidence at all — and McCarthy's rampage seemed unstoppable." 

From The New York Times

I saw the movie Goodnight and Good Luck from 2005 made by George Clooney who actually played Fred Friendly in this movie. I've seen this movie a few times including in the theater when it came out in 2005 and it was about CBS News anchor Edward Murrow, the host of the newscast See It Now. And how they took on Senator Joseph McCarthy who was chairing a committee when Senate Republicans were in the majority from 1953-55, when this committee was investigating Communists in the Federal Government.

Ed Murrow and his staff concluded that Chairman McCarthy was accusing and convicting people they were investigating, based on guilt by association, people who were accused of associating with Communists or Socialists, were automatically labeled as Communists themselves, even if they were just suspected by the McCarthy Committee.

And the Ed Murrow show decided that what Senator McCarthy was doing was wrong and that this had to be reported and be stopped if they can, which is exactly what happened in late 1954. Just after Senate Democrats had won back the majority. And this was controversial of Ed Murrow and See It Now, because back then it was considered wrong for newscasters to take stands on issues, that their job was simply as reporters not commentators.

What Ed Murrow and his staff did was conclude based on what they reported and saw from the McCarthy Committee that it wasn't a matter of opinion in what Senator McCarthy was doing was wrong, but that Senator McCarthy was in fact wrong and what he was doing was so wrong, that he had to be stopped. That it was simply Un-American to label people for who and who they might of associated with, either now or in the past, even if they are Communists.

That attacking people or trying to punish people for who they simply have associated with or may have associated with is wrong and that people should be judged by what they do and say, not what they may believe. Or who they may have associated with. And this wasn't easy for Ed Murrow, because he was not only taking on a powerful Senator and Member of Congress in Joe McCarthy but he was taking on his own bosses at CBS News who didn't believe newscasters should be editorializing.

Without Ed Murrow and See It Now maybe Joe McCarthy would've bombed out on his own and either the Senate. Or the country would've caught on, on their own. But the media especially the TV media wasn't as powerful back then as it is today and See It Now was the only show that was covering this story on a regular basis and had decided that what Senator McCarthy was doing, was not only wrong but needed to be stopped.