Saturday, November 23, 2013

Why We Are Not Covering The Rolling Stone Article

Some have asked, "Why aren't you covering the Manson Rolling Stone Article"? The answer is simple: the media and social platforms are saturated with the story and there's nothing more to be gained by us regurgitating it here.

What's a way more interesting topic to be contemplated here is the implication the article gives us into social context of prisoner's rights in California. As one gay blogger wrote:
So..I cannot be legally married in 33 out of 50 States, but the mass murderer Charles Manson can legally marry some blushing little thing called STAR; while serving life in prison!!!??? Thank Almighty God that the Republican Party has worked so hard to preserve the sanctity of traditional marriage!!!
mansondirect.com
 On another note, if Manson did exercise his right to marry in California should we all be letting out a sigh of relief and gratitude that there will never be any chance of more Little Charlies being born due to victims advocates like Doris and Patricia Tate who succeeded in their lobby to end conjugal visits for lifers in California?

So, you see, this is why we did not post a link to the Rolling Stone article; there are so many more interesting things to contemplate than the drivel of a confused young woman and her hero.





27 comments:

Sun King said...

Well there's not really much new Manson news that comes out these days so I was surprised that this blog chose to not post it.

Totally agree with the points you make but I'd rather make a comment about this news here than on some news papers comment section where most every post merely states rot in hell Charlie. It's become the most popular read article on sites like the Huffington Post.

I don't follow the case as much as I have in the past and was caught off guard with Star and how she's running the Mansondirect website and living in Corcoran. I vaguely remember someone posting on forums as Star years ago and wonder if that was the same person?

Oh to be young and idealistic. She may regret carving the x on her forehead as the other original family members have when trying to get on with their lives.

Suze said...

I read the article shortly after ColScott posted the link. I guess I thought there would be something new but I was disappointed (unless of course we are to take seriously Star’s assertion that she and Charles Manson are going to be married and upon his release (yeah right, LOL) live in her parents’ basement along the Mississippi River).

In my life I have had two long term relationships. One was with a young man and the other with a woman. I live in a state that would only allow me to marry one of them. I find that absurd. What I find more absurd is that Kim Kardashian is allowed to reproduce if she wants, but I digress. Thank goodness Mrs. Tate succeeded in getting conjugal visits outlawed for convicted murderers. If she hadn’t that crazy little girl would rush to reproduce with that 79 year old geezer with bad dentures so she could become the Arc of The Covenant give birth to Christ child.

Panamint Patty said...

Kardashian! bwahahahaha

Patty would just like to say that of all the bloggers who could have been quoted in that article, she is glad it was Marliese. That lady is one class act and a very good representative of the blogging community. Rock on with you bad self!

All that Star shit was a real snore though.

Panamint Patty said...

HOLY CRAP look at the stats! It would appear that the whole world is looking at Manson blogs this week.

Matt said...

Yeah, any more traffic and we'll crash worse than the obamacare site. LOL.

Robert Hendrickson said...

Only 3 questions remain:

(1) Will Star wear white

(2) Will it be filmed by whom and

(3) when will Obama publicly complain that a murderer like Charles Manson is getting more attention than him.

Sun King said...

Robert Hendrickson said... Only 3 questions remain:
(1) Will Star wear white
(2) Will it be filmed by whom and
(3) when will Obama publicly complain that a murderer like Charles Manson is getting more attention than him.
---------------------------------------
If it gets that far I imagine she would wear that white nun habit she is wearing on mansondirect. (Ran out of Rainbow colors?)

Would probably be recorded on a smartphone and posted to YouTube most likely by the guy i see in in other pictures with her. Feel like loading up some camera gear and doing another film? ;-)

Republicans are are actually doing a pretty good job of keeping Obama in the news. Funny though I read that the mayor of Toronto scores higher in popularity polls than Congress and Obama at the moment.

Max Frost said...

Republicans are actually protecting Obama. They could've taken him down for several highly treasonous crimes.

Just like the democrats could've taken W Bush down for several highly treasonous crimes.

These criminals are all on the same side pretending to be opposites.

Divide and conquer.

brownrice said...

What I found interesting about the RS article was that it was the first mainstream article I've ever seen that didn't just quote Helter Skelter... which is a definite change to the last 40 years. A result of the blogs perhaps... No new info of course, but I didn't really expect any. Charlie's a career lifer, he's not gonna spill his guts for a pop rag like RS. He also loves the limelight and has scored quite a bit of it with this interview. He played them really well, I reckon.

I like your Kardashian comment, Suze.

Max Frost said...

What blows my mind is seeing some people out there really believe Manson was seriously questioning whether the article could get him out of prison.

Uh, hello..???

AustinAnn74 said...

Personally, I hate all politicians. I am sick of hearing about both sides. Is that wrong?

Doc Sierra said...

Max Frost said...

Republicans are actually protecting Obama. They could've taken him down for several highly treasonous crimes.

Just like the democrats could've taken W Bush down for several highly treasonous crimes.
------------------------------------
That should be backed up with some facts.....

brownrice said...

AustinAnne74 said; "Personally, I hate all politicians. I am sick of hearing about both sides. Is that wrong?"

No, it's right on (as we used to say) and very wise in this day and age (IMO).

Max Frost said...

Backed up with some facts?

I can't tell if you are joking or not Doc.

If not, all I can say is turn the lights on and watch the room clear in a flash. Watch all the critters frantically scurry away looking for whatever dark places are left to hide once the veil is lifted for all to see.

The problem is there are more than enough facts. Facts and evidence are abundant. But you have to look for them because they won't look for you.

If you think turning on the TV and flipping through "news" channels is a means of being informed then you are living in the dark ages.

No offense Doc. I like you and hope you don't take this in the wrong way. I'm generalizing because this is not the place to lay out a novel.

A good place to start is watching a docu called "America: Freedom to Facism"

Robert Hendrickson said...

WOW, did I miss the writing on the wall ! If THE Charles Manson (last revolutionary hold-out) actually falls for "establishment " MARRIAGE, it's OVER - The revolution is really over. Think about it - young girls will want tatoos on their foreheads, but males will no longer have any "bad-ass" roll models.

Doc Sierra said...

@hexjoe53.
The world be a better place if only your father had pulled out.....

Doc Sierra said...

No offense taken Max and I meant no offense as well.
I'm not a member of ANY political party. I don't need a political party run by greedy, self serving narcissists to tell me what chad to punch on a ballot.
If your argument about Bush is that he lied about WMDs in Iraq I have to disagree. That intelligence was gathered from Sadam's own circle including his generals. Do people really think that Bush would have ordered an invasion, backed by congress, if he knew ahead of time that it was all BS?
Obama has broken some of his most important promises that got him elected in 2008 but what do you mean by treason? Just wondering.
I don't watch the national news very often because I find it to be completely biased. I don't get my news from the Daly Show or The Colbert Report either. If an issue interests me I go online and read from several sources and try to sort out the BS.....

Max Frost said...

Doc, are you at all familiar with PNAC?

Google it but also watch that docu I mentioned.

Matt said...

Max Frost said...
What blows my mind is seeing some people out there really believe Manson was seriously questioning whether the article could get him out of prison.


That one cracked me up, too. Are they kidding?

candy and nuts said...

RH said will Star wear white-seemed strange nothing was mentioned in this article that Star is also Mansons nun we all saw the picture of her in store boughten Nuns habit-unlike the hand sewn robes RED and BLUE made themselves-in the book Taming the Beast Lynette tells this ed george Charlie wants to marry her-apparently he didnt or wouldnt-also it mentions Lynette wrote and article for Rolling Stone in 1978 but Charlie didnt approve of her having it published in RS-now Star is included in most of this article-with her quotes of marriage which we all know would make worldwide headlines -Charlies response to marriage didnt sound as enthused as Stars announcement though

1nonbeliever said...

Presidents keep you from seeing clearly and asking the right questions, they are not the real threat to our existence, just a distraction.

Cielodrive.Com said...

Jon, Stephen and their writers sure make for a great hour of television each night.

Max Frost said...

Right 1nonbeliever.

They are just fronts - puppets.

fiona1933 said...

I really liked the article…and I loved that stuff about Charlie and the guy's arm. Now that really brought the guy to life. It isnt every male writer that would admit liking that…

And it was poignant, Charlie's I-don't-care-about-jail bravado cracking like that…wishing to get out "just for a little while.

He really has told ten different stories about LaBianca though. And nobody ever asks him about the three other so-called murder attempts on the way there. Given they weren't real, but why did he do it?

fiona1933 said...

Doc Sierra. of course Bush would have ordered the invasion. There were plenty of other reasons to do it. What I remember about all that is I was still in the Uk then. And they were saying on TV how Saddam had weapons that could hit us in 45 minutes. And nobody, absolutely nobody, believed that.
What people believed was Hans Blick saying "there are no weapons" and the desperation of the Iraqis as Bush kept counting down the days: "give up the weapons, or 3 days, 2 days".."We have no weapons! Please don't kill us!"

rfoster1 said...

Good call.

sherm maniac said...

Max, I am honestly curious and not trying to be snarky: who are they fronts for?