She wasn’t just “Hollywood’s Sweetheart”; for the late 1950s and early -60s, Connie Stevens was everybody’s sweetheart. (And most notably, Elvis’s.)
And in glorious color:
Did I mention that our girl was also a singer with a Top Ten hit?
And then there were those legs…
Bedtime:
Total sweetheart.
I have no idea how I stumbled onto Bangers & Cash, but I love it (for very obvious reasons). An old-fashioned, gentle TV show about old-fashioned, gentle people talking about old-fashioned, gentle cars.
They talk about them, they restore them, they fix them, and they drive them. It gives me a chance to go back in time, revel in nostalgia… and the only thing missing is a pint or two of Wadworths 6X at my right hand.
It’s all so different from today’s normal frenzied, clickbait-driven fare, which is why I enjoy it so. Join me, if you will. (link in logo below)
Okay, this one got my blood boiling:
A Texas man with a prior murder conviction is accused of running a “full-service drug operation” near several schools where authorities say surveillance showed what appeared to be teenagers purchasing narcotics and fentanyl pills disguised to look like ecstasy.
A convicted murderer was out free on the streets? IN TEXAS? How the fuck did that come about? Why hadn’t he been executed, or at least still be behind bars for the rest of his worthless fucking life?
Also relevant: whose signature is on the petition for release, and whose signature is on the release authorization? (Yeah, we’ll probably never know that, because if we did, it could easily come about that the signatories would be dragged out of their house and beaten with iron bars and chains. In any just society, that is.)
Read the whole thing to get the full horror of it.
Range time.
I’m faced with an uncomfortable dilemma here.
As any fule kno, when it comes to anti-Semitism, I’m with the Semites — lock, stock and barrel (if necessary). I don’t think I have to prove that to anyone.
I am also steadfastly against the legal practice of attributing mindset and attitude (animus) towards crime: murdering someone in cold blood is terrible; whether the murderer shouts “Die, you Jewish bastard!” or “Bye bye, Jew bitch!” while committing the crime is in my mind irrelevant. There’s no such thing as doubleplusterrible, in other words. The crime should be sufficiently punished according to its severity. (In the second example, are we going to add years onto the sentence for both misogyny and anti-Semitism? Trebleplusterrible?)
Which is why this situation makes me profoundly uneasy:
Federal prosecutors have charged a man from the Bronx with hate crime offenses alleging he assaulted a security guard and a congregant in a racially motivated attack at a Manhattan synagogue last week.
Larry Montes was arrested following the alleged attack at Central Synagogue on Friday and was charged by New York State.
On Tuesday, the Justice Department charged him with two counts of committing hate crimes, each of which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years’ imprisonment, and one count of damage to religious property resulting in bodily injury, which carries a maximum 20 years’ imprisonment.
I don’t know whether “damage to religious property resulting in bodily injury” carries a heavier sentence in NYfC than does “damage to [any] property resulting in bodily injury” — I’ll leave that for my Powdered Wig Readers to establish — but it shouldn’t.
Once again, I’m going to restate that my personal inclination is to offer additional protection to, say, synagogues; but I’m not so sure that it should be legal policy.
But given the above, I am also curious to know whether the murder of a White person by a Black person shouting, “Die, cracker!” is punished with the same severity as that of a White person murdering a Black person while shouting “Die, nigger!”
See where all this leads?
Hence my discomfort with the whole issue.
From NYfC, some politician:
“Most of what we saw were crimes of poverty-people who are stealing things like toothpaste, people who were stealing things like, you know, soap. And that means if you’re stealing those things, you need them.”
Justifying crime on the basis of need. Were this not on the Planet Manhattan, I’d think we were all going bats.
Random thought: think this asshole would say differently if someone broke into her house and stole her $10,000 Persian carpet because they “needed” some floor covering?
#RhetoricalQuestion
Your suggestions in Comments.
Final comment (mine): This website has, officially, more dorks per square pixel than any non-scifi website on Teh Intarwebz.