Shakesville

An Unrested-Upon Laurel Gathers No Moss

Weren't you just thinking it was time for Professor James Franco to release an album? Yeah, me too.

Franco and his creative partner, drag performance artist Kalup Linzy

Franco and his creative partner, drag performance artist Kalup Linzy.

Kalup and Franco is the duo of Kalup Linzy, a video/performance artist who frequently performs in drag, and James Franco, an Oscar-nominated movie star (127 Hours, Spider-Man) who has quickly become one of Hollywood's biggest weirdos. The partnership formed after Franco invited Linzy to perform on "General Hospital" during Franco's stint on the soap opera, and they've since become a performance duo and a musical act. On July 12, they'll release their debut EP Turn It Up on Dutty Artz, the label co-founded by the globe-trotting, genre-mashing theorist DJ /rupture.

The EP will be available as a digital download and as a limited-edition 7". It features two songs, "Rising (Both Sides Now)" and "Turn It Up (So We Can Turn It Out)", co-produced by DJ /rupture and his Nettle bandmate Brent Arnold, and "Rising" also features production from /rupture's Dutty Artz partner Matt Shadetek. Linzy produced a third track, "Fly Away". The duo intends to make music videos for each of those three songs, which will feature "surprise guest cameos."

Please let one of the surprise guests be Rip Taylor. Please let one of the surprise guests be Rip Taylor. Please let one of the surprise guests be Rip Taylor...

Know why any super-awesome megastar (like Rip Taylor) would agree to make a surprise guest cameo in one of Kalup and Franco's videos? Because James Franco, no doy.

Blog Note

It's not you: Comments are now taking around a half hour to post to the blog. Unfortunately, it's nothing that we can control, and hopefully Disqus will resolve it soon.

My sincerest apologies for the inconvenience.

UPDATE: Seems to be working again now. (Thanks, Disqus team!) If you're still having problems, fire me a(nother) email.

Atlas Shrugged Part 2!

It's live, folks! I'm talking about the Atlas Shrugged Part II website. Okay, so there's not much there yet except for a too-pixilated slideshow (stills from the first film?) and the text "in theaters fall 2012."

But hey, it shows a real commitment by the producers to plunk down $4.99 at godaddy and get the ball rolling. Or the train rolling. Or something. Not sure what the best Randian metaphor is. Wevs.

No word on a DVD release yet. As soon as I know, you'll know. Because I know you want to know as much as I know. You know? I'll be at Redbox the moment it arrives. And no, I will not park in the fire zone. You shouldn't either!

I suspect the producers are waiting on the theatrical run to wind down. It's still playing in seventeen theaters. Seventeen! Huh? Okay.

Oddly, it is running in Austin, which I had thought, you know, according to legend, was some weird lefty outpost in the red and dusty state of Texas. Maybe not. It's also in "Cape Girandeau" (sic), Missouri, birthplace of Rush Limbaugh. Go, Missouri!

Also, the Ayn Rand vs. Jesus debate is heating up. Check your local listings. I hope George Stephanopoulos hosts. "Why don't you wear a flag pin?" I'd wear a flag pin if it were made of Reardon Metal™. (Take that, Lacoste shirt!)

p.s. Link.

I Was Just Thinking...

...that what the Weiner Saga really needed was for Dr. Drew to weigh in. God bless America etc.

Dr. Drew giving his classic sympathy pout.

Open Thread

Hosted by a H.G. Wells Martian.

Question of the Day

What movie do you love that everyone else (with whom you usually agree about movies) seems to hate?

I love The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. (The '05 version. Wow, was it really that long ago?)

I understand that many people dislike this movie because it deviates quite a bit from the book. And I totally get that. I just don't care, in this case. Even Douglas Adams considered the book unfilmable, and as he wrote the screenplay to make it more "movie friendly," that satisfies me. If it's got his stamp of approval, who am I to argue? Besides, it's just so much fun. I thought the casting was absolutely brilliant; could Martin Freeman be more perfect as Arthur? I also really liked the outside-the-box casting of Mos Def. And Bill Nighy as Slartibartfast? OMG, I wish he was in the whole movie. I even love the added bits with John Malkovich. Alan freaking Rickman!

I thought the design of the film was fantastic. I loved the look of the Heart of Gold. When Deep Thought first appeared on screen, the Spudsband and I burst out laughing. And the creatures on line waiting through Vogon bureaucracy... brilliantly done, especially the Lucha Libre monster and the white, fuzzy, horned thing.

Lastly, the Vogons. The Vogons were so 100% accurate as to how I always pictured them in my head, it was absolutely uncanny. (And bless them for using practical effects, rather than CGI!) Not only did they look fantastic, and this may be my bias as a performer/voiceover artist, but the vocal casting for the Vogons was spot on. Not only did the voices match the character's role perfectly, but physically, if that makes any sense. Watch any scene with a Vogon; you know that's how it would really sound.

Like I said, I understand why many people dislike or were disappointed by this movie. I love it.

Howzaboutyou?

Imagine That.

Third-graders in Tramway Elementary School (Sanford, NC) engaged in a civic exercise and wrote letters to elected officials requesting that they do not slash the education budget--as deep cuts are expected as gov't officials hash out the state's budget.

One state legislator, Mike Stone (R-Of Course) is very upset about this. Very upset. Why? Because one of the letters he received came from his very own daughter:

"I was extremely disappointed, but I tried not to show that in front of my daughter," Stone said. "I don't know that at any time we should use our third-grade students as lobbyists."

The teacher outlined what students should include in the letter, he said, noting his daughter mentioned the loss of two teaching assistants, field trips and science experiments and more difficulty in learning multiplication and reading comprehension.

She ended her letter, "Please put the budget higher dad."

"As I read through this (letter), anger completely shot through me, and I was trying to hold myself together," he said. "(It's unconscionable) to know any education system would use a daughter against her father."

The education system is turning her against you, you say? ORLY?

Superintendent Jeff Moss said letters were also sent from students in other local schools to their representatives and to Gov. Beverly Perdue. Letters weren't written to "Mike Stone, the father" but to "Mike Stone, the representative," he said.

"If you're not interested in receiving letters from people in your district, don't run for public office," Moss said.

He said he doesn't see a problem with a writing exercise that has students supporting public education.

It seems for Rep Stone that he's afraid of the chickens coming home to roost:

Stone said he fears his daughter's classmates will blame her if the teaching assistants lose their jobs.

Well, hello Action. I'd like you to meet Consequence. This is what happens when you are an elected official: you are held responsible for the votes you cast for various pieces of legislation and the repercussions of those votes in your community.

[ETA: I feel I should clarify the above because it was admittedly phrased poorly, to a degree, and has caused no small amount of confusion--and it's distressing to me that anyone would think I'd want a child bullied. My point to do with Stone potentially being held accountable within his community that he represents. Via this exercise (more) people will be aware of him and how he votes (esp. now that he went to the media!)--and to show that he is aware that people will be aware is why the quoted is there. Well, it made sense to me when I was typing the post at the time. But, anyway, it really didn't have anything to do with his daughter. I am sorry about the confusion.]

Photo of the Day

[Click to embiggen.]
First of all, I love that there's a German news story comparing German Chancellor Angela Merkel's and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's midsections, in order to point out they both wear pantsuits and position their hands in a similar fashion while standing.

Secondly, I love that there's an American news story about Merkel presenting Clinton with a framed copy of the German news story, before a state dinner.

Thirdly, I love that Merkel and Clinton are laughing their tits off about it.

[Via @scatx.]

Number of the Day

$7.8 trillion: The cost of GOP presidential wannabe Tim Pawlenty's proposed tax plan, which is triple the size of the Bush tax cuts.

Great idea!

True Fact: Tim Pawlenty is not only the former governor of Minnesota, but is also the current Professor Emeritus of Smartology at Genius University.

What I'm Listening To

"Not a Virgin," by Zach

[Lyrics available here. Via @JaclynF.]

A Thought

I believe there is a place in which the Weiner story can be discussed as neither THE MOST IMPORTANT STORY EVAR IN THE HISTORY OF EVARYTHANG!!!!!1!!!eleventy!! nor a story of no conceivable consequence at all.

I am unhappy, though unsurprised, to discover how vanishingly few people agree with me.

Random YouTubery

A Canadian news segment in which an SPCA rep brings two older puppies to the studio for what was supposed to be a pretty typical adopt-a-pet piece (if seeing dogs jump on people bothers you, skip it):

Video Description: Two women, an anchor and an SPCA rep, introduce two dogs—one a young male German Shepherd and one a young female pitbull. The dogs, from an overcrowded shelter in which kennels can hold up to four dogs, are delighted to be out and about, and they get increasingly playful and affectionate with the two women, prompting the entire newsroom to erupt into laughter.

Honestly, this video just made me laugh so hard. It's when they cut back from the screen with the SPCA's contact information to the studio, and the anchor has just completely succumbed to Ginger the Pitbull in a heap of giggles—

screencap

—I just totally lose my shit.

I know not everyone likes to be jumped on and licked by big dogs, but clearly these ladies don't mind. And, possibly because I have such a calm dog at home myself, I don't mind, either. I'm always the lady at the dog park who's happy to be jumped and rubbed and drooled on by the biggest four-legged slobberchops in the vicinity.

[H/T to a friend at a local pitbull rescue.]

Two Facts

1. David Brooks has written yet another garbage column for the New York Times, called "Where Wisdom Lives."

2. Where Wisdom Lives is not in David Brooks' brainpan.

As usual, there are a lot of things wrong with Brooks' column, but this in particular struck me:

Some Democrats simply want to do nothing as Medicare careens toward bankruptcy. Last Sunday on "Face the Nation," for example, Nancy Pelosi said, "I could never support any arrangement that reduced benefits for Medicare."

Fortunately, more responsible Democrats are looking for ways to save the system.

Why do Brooks' editors allow him to get away with this mendacious horseshit? A failure to support reduced Medicare benefits is not axiomatically synonymous with "wanting to do nothing." There are various ways of addressing the potential shortcomings of Medicare that don't involve a reduction in benefits—raising taxes and/or creating a socialized healthcare system, for example, both of which Representative Pelosi has been known, ahem, to support.

Glenn Beck TV!

Recovering quickly from being fired by those liberals over at Fox News, our good friend Glenn Beck is already on his way back to the top. Did he get his own network? Even better: He's getting his own Youtube channel. Which makes him as awesome as every fourteen-year-old out there. So... You go, Glenn!

This Fall (just in time for sweeps week!) Glenn Beck is launching GBTV, an internet-only subscription-based service.

For $4.95 a month fans and detractors alike (so long as they have a credit card! Paypal coming soon!) can watch Beck's new two-hour show. For another five bucks you also get access to a simulcast of his three hour radio show and a show about the Glenn Beck TV network.

And if you have five-plus hours a day and ten bucks a month to dedicate to watching Glenn Beck, more power to you!

I guess it remains to be seen if people are now willing to pay money to get what they used to get for free. But Beck is promising lots of good things:

Eventually, Mr. Beck said, his goal is to have an array of scripted and unscripted shows alongside his own daily show, which will simply be titled Glenn Beck and will run for two hours on weekday afternoons.

"If you're a fan of Jon Stewart, you're going to find something on GBTV that you're going to enjoy," Mr. Beck said. "If you're a fan of 24, you're going to find something on GBTV that you're going to enjoy."

Yay! I guess. I dunno.

If people are willing to pay for this crap, good on them. I think. Who is willing to pay for this crap? Someone, I am sure.

Maybe the same folks who'd buy the young adult novel Michael Vey: The Prisoner of Cell 25 from Beck's new imprint at Simon and Schuster. Also coming this fall, a new novel "by" Beck titled The Snow Angel. Just in time for Christmas. (And no, before you ask, I will not fucking read that thing.)

Daily Dose of Cute

image of Dudley the Greyhound standing next to the couch, looking directly at me

"Why, hello there."

46 years

In November 1961 Estelle Griswold (left) partnered with Dr. C. Lee Buxton (of Yale's Medical School) to open a small clinic that would provide contraceptives. Mrs. Griswold was also the Executive Director of the Planned Parenthood League of Connecticut. For two decades Planned Parenthood in CT worked mostly as a 'shuttle service' taking clients to states where contraception was legal (though in CT married women with private physicians might be able to get birth control but poor women--or women without connections--were SOL). Anyway, at their new clinic, they counseled married couples in regards to contraception and prescribed whatever would work best for that particular woman. This all sounds very normal today, almost boring. But then? It was revolutionary.

Connecticut had a law on the books, one that came about a result of Anthony Comstock, which said:

"Any person who uses any drug, medicinal article or instrument for the purpose of preventing conception shall be fined not less than fifty dollars or imprisoned not less than sixty days nor more than one year or be both fined and imprisoned."

"Any person who assists, abets, counsels, causes, hires or commands another to commit any offense may be prosecuted and punished as if he were the principal offender."

Ten days after their clinic was opened, Mrs. Griswold and Dr. Buxton were arrested, found guilty, and fined ($100 each). The case went to the Supreme Court (there were previous cases attempting to challenge the law but they did not make it to this point).

Estelle Griswold and Dr. C Lee Buxton in court
In its opinion, delivered by Justice Douglas, the Court said (in part):

We have had many controversies over these penumbral rights of "privacy and repose." These cases bear witness that the right of privacy which presses for recognition here is a legitimate one.

The present case, then, concerns a relationship lying within the zone of privacy created by several fundamental constitutional guarantees. And it concerns a law which, in forbidding the use of contraceptives rather than regulating their manufacture or sale, seeks to achieve its goals by means having a maximum destructive impact upon that relationship. Such a law cannot stand in light of the familiar principle, so often applied by this Court, that a "governmental purpose to control or prevent activities constitutionally subject to state regulation may not be achieved by means which sweep unnecessarily broadly and thereby invade the area of protected freedoms." . Would we allow the police to search the sacred precincts of marital bedrooms for telltale signs of the use of contraceptives? The very idea is repulsive to the notions of privacy surrounding the marriage relationship.

We deal with a right of privacy older than the Bill of Rights - older than our political parties, older than our school system. Marriage is a coming together for better or for worse, hopefully enduring, and intimate to the degree of being sacred. It is an association that promotes a way of life, not causes; a harmony in living, not political faiths; a bilateral loyalty, not commercial or social projects. Yet it is an association for as noble a purpose as any involved in our prior decisions.

Reversed.

The ruling was delivered 46 years ago today on June 7th, 1965.

The case of Griswold v. Connecticut has gone on to influence many other cases, notably: 1972's Eisenstadt v. Baird (which extended the right of contraception to unmarried women), 1973's Roe v. Wade and 2003's Lawrence v. Texas (which struck down Texas's sodomy laws).

Mrs. Estelle Griswold's 111th birthday would be tomorrow. She passed away in 1981.

Another Weiner Thread

There are some new developments in the Weiner story re: his possible use of government resources to carry on his internet affairs. TMZ is reporting that he offered one of his internet girlfriends help from his PR team to construct a cover story about their relationship, though it isn't clear if he meant a private PR team (which would be fine from a legal perspective) or if the meant members of his Congressional staff (which would not be fine from a legal perspective). Radar is reporting that that Weiner had phone sex with another internet girlfriend on a Congressional line.

TMZ and Radar are not genuinely what I would consider reputable sources, but the media outlets appear to have been given access to private communications between the women and Weiner. (For a hefty sum, no doubt.)

If the reports are accurate, despite Weiner's claim during yesterday's press conference that he did nothing that should put his job in jeopardy, this could indeed cause major trouble for him, as the use of official resources for private dalliances is obviously a serious ethical violation.

This is the sort of stuff that the Congressional ethics inquiry will clear up, one way or another.

In any case, one thing is always certain: Chris Matthews is an asshole.

I Get Letters

[Trigger warning for rape culture.]

The latest from the Mixed-Up Files of Ms. Basil E. Trollcollector:

Just wanted to let you know I read your comment policy (even the part that said "Being banned from Shakesville is not an invitation to take your issues to the email inbox of Liss and/or any of the other contributors or mods.")

Not e-mailing to argue, and you have a "Contact" link...so not sure why this isn't an appropriate forum to explain myself.

Just wanted you to know that I was aware of your comment policy and didn't think that it was "rape apologia" to defend [the idea that women shouldn't drink if they don't want to be raped].

…I don't have a desire to continue posting on the site, but being immediately banned for something that didn't feel at all outside of your commenting regulations didn't leave me chance to defend the fact that I'm not a rape apologist, nor a troll who refused to read (or read and ignored) your comment policy.

Once again, I will note the irony of someone violating my comment policy and invading my personal space, despite an awareness of my request that my contact information not be used for such communications, to insist to me that he is not a rape apologist.

For the edification of my correspondent, and anyone else who may be confused: The reason my inbox "isn't an appropriate forum to explain [your]self" is because I have said it isn't and explicitly detailed that it is unwelcome.

When someone sets up a boundary, they don't need to explain or justify it to you.

And when you ignore those boundaries, and someone's agency and right of self-determination to set and define those boundaries, you are an asshole who is hostile to the idea of consent.

That's it and that's all.

Two-Minute Nostalgia Sublime

Carole King: "I Feel The Earth Move"

Blog Note

As many of you have noticed, Disqus is being wonky at the moment. It's taking comments awhile to appear on the page.

Please just be aware that this is happening, and you don't need to resend your comments multiple times. They'll show up in a couple of minutes.