UPDATE:  Regarding the e-mail incident between a U of Berkeley student and Sachi Landscaping–the guy is completely denying it was him but hasn’t provided one iota of proof that it wasn’t (details here).  And Mr. Zeiser contacted me via Twitter and said

Nice little passive aggressive compliment along with an insult.  But whatevs….I have not yet responded but my inclination is no. My thinking is that the kind of tripe he is pushing is already being blasted at the populace by really large media outlets like Fox, The Heritage Foundation, the American Spectator (for whom he has written in the past), the Daily Caller and dozens of other venues. Why should I let him use my little blog to broadcast his viewpoint when the entire Twitter conversation is all one really needs to know.  So I suggest you all read the entire Twitter conversation and make up your own mind.


So, earlier today I was watching my Twitter scroll with one eye while trying to program in C# with the other and a couple of things jumped out at me.  The first was a Storify* from @AngryBlackLady (one of my favorite writers, commentators and all around smart people online) about a conversation between her and a conservative supposed PhD  who insisted on debating her about Obamacare regardless of whether she wanted to or not.

From @ABL’s Twitter Feed

If you don’t want to read the long exchange (you really should just for the giggles, the image above is a summary of his worst statements) it boils down to her getting angry at him for pestering her for days and telling him to leave her alone.  So he resorts to using some misogynist and racist terms to refer to her and finally he refuses to acknowledge the ugliness behind what he said or apologize for it.  At the end, of course, he claims to be the victim of the whole thing. It will make you feel all fuzzy inside–not.

Not long after reading that I saw a Tweet by @LaloAlcaraz, a man of many talents (you might have seen his comics in your local newspaper if you live in the Southwestern U.S.).  He shared an email exchange between a University of Berkeley student and the owner of a local business.  The student is a member of CASA (Chicano Architecture Student Association) and asked very respectfully if her organization could get a tour of his business.  His response?

You can see Lalo’s photo of the full email exchange and the explanation here.    Not only is the business owner’s response ugly he also claims to be victimized by the request for the tour.

I don’t know about you but I’m seeing a rash of white males (just one example) running around crying about being victims to us “delicate flowers” and/or “savages” and/or “illegals”.  The irony is that anybody with a brain can see that white males, particularly older ones, still run this country and pretty much the entire fucking world.  This is serious “crazy making” behavior . It’s like women and minorities are in an abusive relationship with the rest of U.S. society.  They keep kicking us and then telling us that it’s our fault and we made them do it.  And then we when we legitimately confront them over it, they tell us that we’re the racist/bigots trying to stir up ill feelings that disappeared the moment the Black Marxist Muslim Usurper was elected in 2008.  And us wimmin folk, once we got the right to vote back in 1920 it’s been easy pickings since then, amiright my fellow delicate blossoms?   It’s all unicorns shitting one hundred dollar bills, rainbows and cotton candy, dontcha know!  Except, of course, for that painful black eye and those sore ribs we keep getting.

But there might be some hope.   Take for instance the revenge that has been enacted against ABL’s harasser.  If one were to Google his name (I highly recommend it, click this link and it will do it for you automatically) you will find a link to the Storify item I mentioned earlier about 4 or 5 results down.   The more people click on it, the more this will rise in Google search results whenever anyone searches for Mr. Zeiser.   And in so doing, it will air his statements about how much fun it is to “collect scalps”, how he called people of color and anyone who disagrees with him “savages”, and other various lovely things.  Note this isn’t harassment or libel or slander**.  He really did write these things and by doing this on Google we can ensure that even if he tries to deny it, the proof is easy to find.  As a side benefit whenever someone looks him up to find out more about him, one of the first things they will learn is that nature of his character is less than desirable.  Also do not Tweet about this conversation and mention ABL’s Twitter nom de plume. She’s over it and I don’t blame her–keep her out of the discussion unless she chooses to rejoin it on her own.

The other little bit of good news is that the Berkeley student has approached her College’s faculty in hopes that they will address the matter but many people have seen this exchange online now and I’m hoping it will descend squarely on this guy’s head so that he loses his license to practice.  However, the student has asked people online not to interact with the company directly so DO NOT contact the business owner or the company.  Nevertheless, if you live in Southern California (and I know a few people that do) keep this guy and his business in mind because if he or his company tries to get your business (or anyone you know) you can tell him to “piss off”.  If he wants to know why tell him it’s the “Free Market” coming back to bite him in the ass.

The ugliness of these kinds of exchanges is why I have to take a break from the Internet on occasion.  Then again, people like ABL and Lalo pull me back in because they are never afraid to point it out, call it what it is, and they don’t let it make them crazy.  I don’t have their coping mechanisms yet but I’m getting there.


*For those who don’t know, Storify is a way to document a series of Tweets over a long period of time.  It puts them in the proper time order which can be very hard to do on your own without such an app.

**I’m not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV.  However, libel/slander is propagating something you know is untrue.  And it don’t get any more real than that there Twitter exchange.

The link to the Spanish version of this post

As usual, there be spoilers aplenty in this review if you haven’t read the book or watched the show.


This episode was strange in a few ways that I will get in to as I run through what happened.  It starts with Frank in the police station and we see that he’s still looking for Claire but no one else seems to be.  I feel bad for him but this is much more than we got in the book. So far, I think the show has done enough to let us know that Claire loves him and wants to get back to him but I’m not sure this scene isn’t overkill especially in light of the fact that he later decides to give up and leaves Inverness (and Claire’s suitcase behind).  More on that later.

So we feel sorry for Frank and the fact that everyone else thinks she ran out on him.  We see a poster on the wall of not only Claire but of Jamie.  This confused me because in the book AND on the show Frank never got a good enough look at Jamie to give that kind of detail.  Then again Frank is MI6 trained and who knows what he was able to pull up from his memory.  And then from the dark and gloomy 1940’s we go back to Claire and Jamie in verdant and beautiful Scotland of the 1740’s.  This episode more so than any other highlights the differences between the time periods using coloring.  Dark and drab present versus the vibrant and colorful past.  That’s because the past is the present to Claire– the more time she spends with Jamie the more the 1940’s becomes like the past to her.  I don’t mind this visual cue to her changing emotional state.  It works for me.  There were other things that didn’t work for me though and I’ll get to them as I go thru the story.

Jamie's modern wanted poster, note the handwriting that says "Jacobite brooch, possibly 18th Century"

Detail from Jamie’s modern wanted poster, note the handwriting that says “Jacobite brooch, possibly 18th Century”

Okay, so Jamie and Claire are being all lovey dovey and he wants to know is it typical what they experience when they’re making love and she says it can be like that but no, it’s not usual at all.  What they have is special.  I had a problem with this scene.  It needed to be more emotional and so far it is just coming across as physical.  In the books it’s more emotional and it was a scene that I highly anticipated.  And it didn’t translate here the way it needs to–Claire still seems shallow.  As I mentioned in my first review of The Wedding–while it is too soon for her to be forgetting Frank, there should be an undeniable emotional connection developing between her and Jamie.  And this scene where he asks her “is this special” and she says “yes” was crucial to establishing that.  But it didn’t work IMHO.

Then they had the interlude with Hugh Monroe, the mute beggar, showing up to advise Jamie of an English deserter named Horrocks who was an eyewitness to the murder that Jamie is accused of and did not commit.  I liked the guy who played Hugh and how he came across on screen.  The piece of amber that he gave to Claire was much larger than I expected and seemed to have a lot of other stuff in it too.  In my imagination the dragonfly was bigger and the amber smaller and it was clean.  However, the one he gives her looks much more natural and is probably more like what one would find in reality anyway.

A wedding gift from Hugh Monroe, a dragonfly in amber

A wedding gift from Hugh Monroe, a dragonfly in amber

Wee Roger. I can't wait to see him all grown up!

Wee Roger. I can’t wait to see him all grown up!

They switch again to Frank and I don’ t know why they have this scene EXCEPT to introduce Roger Wakefield, who will be VERY important next season.  The rest of the scene was unnecessary and I wish they’d stuck with just Jamie and Claire, exploring their growing emotional connection or used this time later to delve more into the relationship with Jamie and Dougal.  However, since they didn’t introduce Roger when Claire was still in the 1940’s they have to do so now before we get too far into the story.  Anyway, my only other complaint here might be that Roger’s eyes are supposed to be a really bright green.  But since Geillis’ eyes (on the show) aren’t that green then I guess they don’t need to find a Roger with eyes that green either (remember book readers Geillis is his great-grandmother to 7th power or something like that).  On an aside, I’ve noted that they’ve put out casting calls for Brianna and Roger and I’ve got my fingers crossed that they strike gold again. They did an outstanding job with this first cast (Caitriona and Sam I’m looking at you) so the odds are good they’ll find just the right people.  Okay before I start sounding like a #poutlander, I’ll move on.  (And yes, I totally stole that hashtag from Outmander, my favorite male take on the series–you have to read his reviews, they’re great).

Frank's mannerisms with the blond in the bar were disturbingly like Black Jack and I suspect Menzies is doing this blurring of the characters on purpose and to good effect

Frank’s mannerisms with the blond in the bar were disturbingly like Black Jack and I suspect Menzies is doing this blurring of the characters on purpose and to good effect

Next we’re back to Frank in a bar getting set up by some blond and I can’t believe he falls for it.  His MI6 instincts should have been screaming at him but I’m sure that was dulled by the amount of booze in his system and the fact that he’s absolutely desperate to find Claire.  But when he got another drink after agreeing to meet with the suspicious lady, I was like, “Well, that’s a brilliant idea, ya eedjit!”

Then we jump back to Claire and Jamie making googly eyes at one another next to the fire while Rupert tells stories about a Waterhorse (one of my favorite myths from the books BTW).  This scene is very similar to the books where they’re ambushed by a rival clan (the Grants) and they have to fight them off while Claire hides in terror completely unable to defend herself.  What is different is that Claire hid beside an old log instead of in some rocks (understandable, they have to work with the scenery at hand).  Less understandable is them not showing Dougal and Jamie fighting back to back and how Dougal gets wounded.  That scene shows how well Dougal and Jamie know one another and we learn from it later that it was Dougal that taught Jamie to fight with a sword.  So later down the road when things turn out as they do (trying not to be too spoileriffic here) it’s all the more tragic.  Again, instead of seeing Frank be a total doofus and walk into an ambush, which is the very next scene, we could have seen how close Jamie and Dougal really are and just why that relationship is so gosh darn complicated.  Then again, maybe I’m nitpicking.

Then back again to Frank where he is ambushed and two guys attempt to rob him while the blond looks on.  Now I totally expected Frank to prevail and he did.  What I didn’t expect was him to get all chokey on the woman.  My BF said, “see I told you Frank is not a nice guy–he’s bad just like his ancestor”.  I didn’t have an answer for that really. I wanted to tell him that Frank will redeem himself later through Brianna but I didn’t want to spoil what’s coming up in the story in Season 2–he’s not a book reader.  Anyway, again, I don’t think we needed this scene UNLESS the producer has some need of it as groundwork for Frank having to be brutal again.  But I don’t know of a single instance in the books where that is necessary so this need for Frank to be so tough would have to be something made up from whole cloth.

Is that a black jack in your pocket Frank or are you just happy to see me?  Actually quite the funny pun by the writers, innit?

Is that a black jack in your pocket Frank or are you just happy to see me? Actually quite the funny pun by the writers, innit?

Back again to 1740’s (are you getting dizzy yet) where the fellas all agree that Claire needs to know more than how to drop a knife in terror—like how to stab a guy in the kidneys.  So they show her how to use it and where to stick them withe pointy end (you didn’t think I’d go without at least one Game of Thrones reference did you?).  Then back to 1940’s where Frank is told by Mrs. Graham of the stories of how people travel through time through the stones. Did you note that little Roger overheard that convo about the stones. I do wonder if he’ll remember it when he gets older…hmmmmm. Anyway, Frank packs up his stuff and leaves the Reverend’s house.  He also leaves her suitcase behind and I’m not sure if it was because he thinks she might return and need it or if he is trying to leave the memories behind. Again, I have to point this out because I have some kind of book OCD thingy but if I recall correctly Frank doesn’t leave Inverness and continues to wait for Claire.  So I’m not sure why the producers are having him leave.  What is important to note here is that he is giving up on her sort of like she has been giving up on him.  Which leads us to the final scenes and how this all ties together.

Evil finds punctures in good men says the good Reverend, so he advises Frank to go back to Oxford and start his life over

Evil finds punctures in good men says the good Reverend, so he advises Frank to go back to Oxford and start his life over

Murtagh, "I still say the only good weapon for a woman is poison."  Dougal, "Perhaps but it has certain deficiencies in combat."

Murtagh, “I still say the only good weapon for a woman is poison.” Dougal, “Perhaps but it has certain deficiencies in combat.”

The story shifts back to Claire and Jamie and they’re getting it on in the grass and it’s clear that Frank is not anywhere on her mind at all (see what I mean about shallow–she’s so taken up with fucking Jamie that she’s forgotten the whole point of her being on this trip in the first place–to get back to that darn fairy hill).  She’s all about the boom boom with Mr. James right at that moment.  Until they get attacked by a couple of British deserters who try to rape her and make Jamie watch.  Claire puts her new knife skills to good use and kills her attacker which allows Jamie to kill his.  Afterward she is so in shock and so deeply disturbed that it snaps her out of the postcoital fog of the last few days.

Shock begins to set in after Claire and Jamie kill their attackers

Shock begins to set in after Claire and Jamie kill their attackers

On a re-watch I realized that Claire says she’s angry but she doesn’t know why. But in her dialog with Jamie before he leaves to go meet Horrocks, it seems she’s pretty mad at him for not protecting her earlier–for her having to kill the guy herself. This is how it is in the books too and I always thought it was a bit unfair of her. I mean, she was rutting away in the woods too and just as responsible for their getting attacked by the deserters. In any case, she goes on to say she’s angry she’d stopped trying to get back to Craig Na Dun and she explains her anger away as guilt for having betrayed Frank and almost forgetting about him. This makes more sense to me…she’s falling in love with Jamie, almost against her will, she just can’t help it but she feels bad about it, as any woman with a conscience should.

As a result Jamie and the fellas leave her with the youngest and least capable guy, Willy (I think his name was) to go meet with Horrocks–the guy that is supposedly going to exonerate Jamie.  Again, this is different than in the books.  In the books she was left alone in the forest–her promise to Jamie trusted as being enough so that she would not go anywhere and endanger herself (or endanger them for that matter).  Also she was scared of being left alone in the books.  What IS similar as in the books is that she sees Craig Na Dun and realizes this will be her last, best chance to get there so she high tails it off leaving Willy with his pants around his ankles (literally–he was taking a dump).

Simultaneously in the future (yes, I know it sounds dumb that’s what’s happening) Frank is driving past Craig Na Dun and he just can’t stop himself…he goes up to the stones.  And conveniently enough she arrives just as he arrives.  The “door” through time is open or at least thin enough for him to hear her shouting his name.  There was a nice little Easter Egg in the show…and I give TOTAL credit to Outmander for catching this one when I did not…they announce on Frank’s car radio that General George S. Patton had died. Now we can google that Patton died on Dec. 21, 1945 and if you know your calendar that is the Winter Solstice.  Anyway, the veil is thin and he hears her voice but just as you think she’s made it (she couldn’t ya know, or there would be no series) she gets dragged away by some Redcoats.  Frank gives up dejectedly. I’m not sure if Frank understood that she might have actually gone back in time…he did hear her voice, right? So at the end I’m not sure if Frank continued on to Oxford or if he returned to Inverness to wait for her return. Meanwhile, Claire is carted off to Ft. William where she encounters Black Jack Randall.

Ft. William in the show is Blackness Castle for real.  Verra intimidating, no?

Ft. William in the show is Blackness Castle for real. Verra intimidating, no?

Black Jack almost does a spit take upon hearing her utter the Duke of Sandringham's name.

Black Jack almost does a spit take upon hearing her utter the Duke of Sandringham’s name.

I don’t know how many times I can say this and why Claire just doesn’t get it, I don’t know, but she cannot outwit Black Jack.  He is far wilier than her.  She just needs to accept this and move on.  She throws her only weapon, the knowledge of his patron, the Duke of Sandringham and he is surprised but recovers nicely by asking her if she was also working for the Duchess–who doesn’t exist.  Claire falls right into the trap and says she knows the Duchess and, of course, the jig is up.  So he enjoys himself by tying her up and trying to rape her at knife point when who busts in the window but Mr. Jamie “I look so damn good in a kilt with the saft Scottish rain in my hair” Frazer, who says “I’ll thank you to get your hands off my wife”.  And how does Jack react?  He laughs.  Yep, he did that, he actually did that.  And that’s how it ends.

Jamie, always the frigging hero busts in to save the day and to keep his promise to Claire

Jamie, always the frigging hero busts in to save the day and to keep his promise to Claire

In regards the juxtaposition scene of Frank and Claire at Craig Na Dun, I’m not sure I liked it. Other reviewers definitely didn’t. But that was on purpose. Ronald D. Moore admitted in the “inside the episode” tidbit that this sequence of Claire and Frank almost meeting again at Craig Na Dun was on purpose in order to tweak us readers into wondering, “what the hell is he doing to the story?!” In which case, he can consider our collective noses tweaked well and good.

Now we wait for another 6+ months until April 2015 when the final 8 episodes of Season 1 will air.  I don’t know what I’ll do in the meantime to get my Outlander fix.  Cry in my Atholl?  Yeah, I couldn’t resist.  All joking aside, I probably WILL cry into some kind of alcoholic beverage (repeatedly) whilst re-reading the books.  And I’ll be reading Outmander’s blog as he has lots of fun stuff lined up for the hiatus.  Until next time….

Some quickies for you:

  • Dinesh D’Souza, asshat extraordinaire, is a big whiny child.  Those evil prosecutors are doing their job and trying to put him in prison.  How dare they?!  He’ll get probation and we’ll probably still have to see his idiocy on Bill Maher.
  • Conservatives are freaking out because the President saluted with a coffee cup in his hand.  I would rather have a latte in the middle of my salute than a Scottish Terrier.  And never mind about the real problems this country has because the paranoid, desperate, white, male base eats up this shit up.
  • Can I just say how much I admire Gabby Giffords?  She is absolutely amazing to have come back from that horrible tragedy in Tucson AND launch a PAC to fight against NRA extremism.  What’s even better?  It’s working.
  • If I hear one more liberal complain that the President isn’t liberal enough, is ineffectual and that Congress sucks, I’m going to go nuclear and remind them that it’s probably because they didn’t vote in the f*%!ing 2010 mid-terms.  Here’s just one very good example of how that has hurt and will continue to hurt us for years to come.
  • How effed up is that Emma Watson, of Harry Potter fame, gave a speech to the U.N. on feminism and as a result was threatened with sexual violence and having nude photos of her posted online. This kind of terrorizing online is getting worse, not better.  I don’t know the solution but I really feel for any woman who is harrassed and terrorized because she speaks her mind on the Intertoobs.
  • Love the fact that big tech companies are divesting themselves of ALEC.  If you don’t know who they are, they’re what’s wrong with America.  A group of corporate representatives and conservatives who draft “model” legislation that they then push using vast resources in multiple states.  Their laws which include gems like SB1070, Stand your Ground,  Voter ID, and many more are nightmares and they’re making headway in many state legislatures because people aren’t paying attention to what’s happening on the state level. They’re too busy hating the President (see “Coffeegate” above and Congress (lowest approval ratings ever) on the national level and worrying about things that aren’t immediate threats (Ebola, Isis, etc).
  • And speaking of ISIS, don’t you just love that we’ve gone to war and there was absolutely no debate in Congress?!  They’d rather have yet another vote on appealing Obamacare.  Never mind that the rising cost of healthcare has actually slowed down as a direct result of the law, which was one of the main points of it in the first damn place.  Who needs facts….right?

I’d better stop while I’m ahead.  Methinks I’m getting my mojo for political blogging back and it’s about damn time!

Okay, so last night I watched “The Wedding” episode of Outlander again–this time without interruption of the BF or the kids or a bad mood.  And, of course, it was much improved.   Overall, it’s a great episode and Sam Heughan could not be any sexier.  Literally, could not be more or hundreds of thousands of women around the world would spontaneously combust.  I still don’t like the way that Dougal is being portrayed but I have to believe they’re doing it for a reason.  I hope that was less bitchy and whiny that my original review.

An invitation to the wedding I created

An invitation to the wedding I created

In Ronald D. Moore we trust

In Ronald D. Moore we trust

As I’ve said many times before if you haven’t read this books this post will be full of SPOILERS!


!!!Outlander Spoilers!!!


This was a good episode.  I went into it wanting it be THE best episode I’d seen yet.  After all I’d anticipated this wedding for so many years that perhaps I was expecting too much.  Unfortunately I still have to give the “Best Ep” award to last week’s “The Garrison Commander”.  I don’t know what it was….the fact that I was in a bad mood and exhausted or if it was because of changes from the book that threw me off or if it was because of the inability to hear/see everything going on from Claire’s perspective (like we do in the book).  I just had a similar feeling, a let down, that I had watching a certain death in Game of Thrones (no spoilers here)…it just didn’t have the same emotional impact or humor.   This week I’m not going to recap so much as review it.

A happy and eager bride, Claire and Frank in the 1900's

A happy and eager bride, Claire and Frank in the 1900’s

A reluctant bride, Claire and Jaime in the 1700's

A reluctant bride, Claire and Jaime in the 1700’s

Again, it’s a good episode.  The acting was very good.  We finally get to see Sam Heughan let his charisma flag fly and boy does it ever.  He could not be any more hunky–he had it turned up to 11.  The chemistry between Jaime and Claire is outstanding and sexy.  So much so that the boyfriend noticed at the end of the episode I was a little flushed.  I told him it was the wine and hot flashes but I don’t think he believed me.

Claire's wedding dress was incredible

Claire’s wedding dress was incredible

The costumes are wonderful.  Her dress was gorgeous except (and here comes some more negativity, that’s just where I’m at right now) her chest looked weird in some shots.  I know that I’m probably gonna get some criticism for what I’m about to say but I feel like I need to be honest.  Catriona Balfe is a stunningly beautiful woman however she is not well endowed.  I always pictured Claire to be more curvy than thin and Catriona, a former catwalk model, is extremely thin.  The dress was obviously made to give more oomph to the wearer’s bustline and it certainly helps in this case.  Unfortunately, it seemed too tight, like they were trying too hard to make her breasts look larger.  At times, side camera angles show the awkwardness of the effect (maybe it’s just me but take a second look and tell me what you think, I’m betting her nipples were sore).   That’s not to say that Caitriona isn’t right for the role.  She’s awesome.  It’s just that I have a firm idea of  what Claire looks like and it doesn’t match up to Caitriona (and for that matter my Jaime is different than Sam–my Jaime is fiercer looking, not as pretty, nose more crooked and definitely taller because that’s what I find sexy, never liked pretty boys terribly much).  However, I can easily separate the books from the show as far as the characters go and it doesn’t bother me.  I’m good with both actors–they’ve done an excellent job so far and I am eager to see what they do with the challenges facing their characters going forward.  However,  I was distracted by the tightness of the bodice (is that what you call that part or is it the stomacher?)–it just seemed unnecessary and weird to me.  Anyway, back on topic….

Dougal is nae so happy about goings on in the bridal suite

Dougal is nae so happy about goings on in the bridal suite

I liked the ring made from a key idea…that was a nice romantic change.  I liked the comedy of the way Ned acquired the dress and how Rupert and Angus barged in their room.  And I liked the way Murtagh said she smiled like Jaime’s mother, which is a quote from much later in the book that they simply decided to use much earlier.  On the other hand, I didn’t like the way that Dougal acted.  I seriously do not remember him being such a jealous asshole.  See in the book he’s a very complicated person. He’s attractive and charismatic and that hides a ruthless person.  He is in control of himself, almost always, except for the one time where he gets really drunk at the Gathering.  He isn’t jealous of Jaime so much as he is simply attracted to Claire and he clearly has no scruples about diddling his nephew’s new wife.  But it’s very clear he’s not in love with Claire.  In the show, Dougal seems very different.  He’s not as charismatic and his doesn’t come across as being all that much in control of himself. He also doesn’t hide the ruthlessness as well and does seem that he’s much hotter for Claire than Book Dougal.  Furthermore, it makes me wonder just how they’re going to deal with what readers know is coming up–his relationship with Geillis.  Book Dougal could clearly cheat on Geillis and think nothing of it.  Show Dougal seems to be the more passionate kind of guy.  This negative reading of Show Dougal has been growing on me over the season but I haven’t said anything until now because it was still okay, until this episode tipped the scale.

Now about the sex because it has to be addressed.  It was really very tasteful, realistic and yes, hot.  I thought it was brilliant to have Jaime act like a typical male virgin (i.e., done in less than 5 minutes) because it’s stupid in romance novels where the guy is this fantastic lover his first time.  I also liked the way they didn’t just rip their clothes off.  The slow burn we’ve been enduring continues as she stops him from kissing her with questions.  Then later as he undresses her.  We get to see Jaime’s hesitation and a little frustration at the number of laces on her bodice.  Claire’s reaction to the first time was perfect too.  You could almost see a bubble over her head that said, “Really?  That’s it?”.   But she liked it enough to want more and that’s important.  The second time is better and she enjoys it even more, enough to climax at least.   By the end she’s decided that in for a penny, in a for pound and she might as well enjoy herself.  Here we finally see the modern 1940’s woman….she’s takes the initiative, she’s on top and she’s finally teaching Jaime what a real woman should be like in the bedroom.  Murtagh was right, Sam needed and wanted a woman, not a cowering little girl like Laoghaire who doesn’t know her ass from a hole in the ground.

'Was that it?!'

‘Was that it?!’

Is it hot in here or is it me?

Is it hot in here or is it me?

Unfortunately all this is followed by an ending that I’m not sure I like it’s implications.  In the end Claire seems to already be in love with Jamie and thinking about having to choose between him and Frank.   In the book Jamie was in love with her when he married her but Claire didn’t admit  to herself or to him that she loved him in return until they had returned to Castle Leoch.  And it’s important to note that on their way back to the Castle, she tries to escape from Jaime and the McKenzies to get back to Craig Na Dun–so clearly she wasn’t as conflicted in the book this early.  She told herself it was infatuation and not real and it was enough to keep her allegiances clear–to Frank.  But that’s not how it felt in this episode and I think it will affect non-readers viewing the show.  In fact, the ending where she looks at both her rings and ponders the choice irritated my sig other who is not a reader–he scoffed at her already being in love with Jaime and it seriously made him think less of her.  He understood the necessity of Claire marrying him and her situation, but he didn’t accept that after having sex she suddenly would even consider abandoning Frank.  He just thought it made her slutty and fickle.  Sadly, part of me actually agrees.  And from a storytelling standpoint it doesn’t make sense to me.  The show has invested quite a lot of effort showing us how much she loves Frank and actually does a better job than the books ever did.  And for all that effort, it seems that they’re just tossing that aside in the space of an episode.

Claire is already confused

Claire is already confused

For my part, I hope I’m wrong.  I really hope they reinforce her allegiance to Frank next week and show her attempt to leave Jaime because I think non-readers need to see that Claire still loves Frank or they simply won’t respect her and when she does make a choice it will be anti-climactic.

If one were only paying attention to Faux News and Congress, one would think that Benghazi was and is a scandal of monumental proportions without precedence of any kind.  So much so that many Republicans routinely say they will use it as evidence for impeachment.  They also use it as a wonderful distraction from things that remain unresolved such as our plan to drop bombs on ISIS, Russia’s “invasion” of Ukraine, Immigration Reform, and our slow moving economy.  Not that it isn’t important–it is and the causes that lead to the breakdown in security at our Benghazi Consulate have since been corrected.

What is most important about Benghazi is how Republicans are using it as a political football by saying it is unique and something that should be laid exclusively at President Obama’s feet.  In reality there have been no less than thirteen, yes I said 13, previous attacks on U.S. Consulates, Embassies and their associated staff and troops abroad during the Bush Presidency from 2002 until 2008 before President Obama was elected.  Bob Cesca over The Daily Banner  has the complete list.  If we want to go further back, there are plenty more.  I distinctly remember the bombing of our marine barracks in Beirut back in 1983 under yet another Republican president, good ol Ronnie Raygun.

When those incidents occurred what did we hear?  Did we see Dems attacking those Presidents?  Or did we see everyone understand that those are dangerous jobs in dangerous places doing important work for our country?   There were no calls for impeachment, no endless investigations that failed to find anything, no scandals, nothing.  Because shit happens overseas in dangerous regions.  But the fact that there’s nothing there to find with Benghazi doesn’t matter to Republicans.  They keep beating that dead horse (just like they did with ACORN).

The GOP propaganda machine has realized that the squeaky wheel gets the grease.   And it doesn’t hurt that the majority of the news media in the U.S. is owned by a very small group of rich conservative white males and their monopolistic corporations. Fortunately for Americans (and my sanity) they can’t change history or hide reality so long as liberal bloggers like Bob, media watchdogs like Media Matters, and individual bloggers like myself keep up the good fight.  So here’s your daily dose of truth–Benghazi was tragic and has been appropriately addressed.  The rate of these kinds of attacks have actually been less under President Obama.  It was not unique or evidence of wrongdoing constituting impeachable offenses.  If it were, then all thirteen of the attacks Bob listed would have been as well.