Decoding Dan Rather (5-12-24)

Posted on May 12, 2024 by Luke Ford

01:00 Dan Rather, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Rather
07:00 Did the press uncover watergate? https://www.commentary.org/articles/edward-epstein-3/did-the-press-uncover-watergate/
09:00 Netflix documentary on civil rights, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=148976
11:00 The Age of Entitlement: America Since the Sixties–A Conversation with Author Christopher Caldwell, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36-nBl5uBmc
20:00 Women, mediocrity and excellence, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=129132
25:00 The Age of Entitlement: America Since the Sixties, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=148976
39:00 Most news is unimportant, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=131296
50:00 Conservative Claims of Cultural Oppression: The Nature and Origins of Conservaphobia, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=144168
52:00 We all have hero systems, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=146534
1:01:50 Sailer’s First Law Of Female Journalism, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=121714
1:02:50 What should you expect from the news? https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=146911
1:04:00 The craft of interviewing, https://lukeford.net/essays/contents/interviewing.htm
1:10:00 The News Is What Bureaucracies Report, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=144534
1:15:00 What should you expect from the news? https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=146911
1:25:00 Where do journalists come from? https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=137084
1:37:00 Watergate as democratic ritual, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=143174
1:48:00 NYT: Why Antiwar Protests Haven’t Flared Up at Black Colleges Like Morehouse, https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/11/us/politics/biden-morehouse-black-colleges.html
1:54:00 HBO’s Small Town News & That Noble Dream: The ‘Objectivity Question’, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=141668
2:06:00 Dan Rather’s sweater period
2:08:30 The Liberal Liturgy, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=138045
2:12:40 The News Is What Bureaucracies Report, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=144534
2:16:00 Former USC medical school dean blames sickness for bad behavior
2:20:00 When Did Intellectuals Stop Supporting The Free Market Of Ideas? https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=143526
2:25:00 Conservative Claims of Cultural Oppression: The Nature and Origins of Conservaphobia, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=144168
2:29:30 The Politics of Expertise, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=143550
2:32:30 What’s the frequency, Kenneth?
2:48:00 How The News Differs From Reality, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=144347
2:53:00 The “Objective Facts” of Journalism, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=140236
2:55:40 Christopher Caldwell: The Age of Entitlement
3:08:45 The Case Against The News, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=141853
3:26:00 Reporter Seymour Hersh, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=138924
3:30:00 Journalistic Ethics (12-9-20), https://rumble.com/vbv08f-journalistic-ethics-12-9-20.html
3:40:00 All the News That’s Fit to Click: How Metrics Are Transforming the Work of Journalists, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=154027

Transcript.

Podnotes summary: As a child, I dreamed of being a Christian missionary but ended up immersing myself in American culture after moving to the U.S. in 1977. Without a TV at home, I spent months reading through decades of Reader’s Digest and other magazines at Pacific Union College library before starting sixth grade.

My understanding of America grew from these readings and later television when my father bought one for distraction while defending his views against the Seventh-day Adventist Church. This period sparked my interest in journalism as an access pass to world events—inspired by figures like Dan Rather who became CBS Evening News anchor in 1980.

I interviewed Stormy Daniels multiple times between 2003-2007; she was always intelligent and poised, just like recently on the news. The media shapes our view of the world, often reflecting a liberal perspective that emphasizes individual rights over traditional group identities.

Journalism is not immune to bias; it can be influenced by personal ties or social activism under the guise of reporting truth. Civil rights coverage is an example where media focus tends to ignore certain aspects such as post-legislation violence committed by beneficiaries rather than opponents.

Dan Rather himself struggled with his role as journalist versus activist during civil rights movements—a testament to how journalists are sometimes torn between objectivity and advocacy.

In conclusion, understanding America’s past requires sifting through narratives shaped by various interests and perspectives—not just what we see on screen or read in print but also recognizing underlying motivations behind those stories.

Even without biased media coverage, the Vietnam War was a disaster from the start. America’s involvement wasn’t in its best interest and cost dearly, with troops being sacrificed for no vital national gain. Captain Hank Lu led an inclusive company of the 101st Airborne, embodying “same mud, same blood,” but reality showed racial divisions and ineffective diversity within army units.

The draft brought in low-IQ individuals due to improper IQ test usage by the U.S. Army. This led to dangerous situations and eventually changed recruitment practices. Cohesion was lacking compared to German troops who shared common backgrounds.

Christopher Caldwell discussed affirmative action and political correctness as pillars of post-1964 civil rights movements at Clare Institute, suggesting they were inevitable yet flawed extensions of liberalism that undermined democracy.

Journalism often prioritizes compelling stories over important ones for ratings or aligns with funders’ interests—whether governmental or corporate—affecting narratives like Trump’s alleged Kremlin ties used by The New York Times for profit despite their falsity.

Dan Rather’s portrayal as a patriotic journalist is questioned; his reporting may have been influenced by peer respect rather than truth-seeking alone. Journalism can be self-serving and not always focused on critical issues—it thrives on attention-grabbing content rather than informative substance.

Caldwell’s book “The Age of Entitlement” critiques how civil rights laws bypassed checks and balances, fostering division instead of unity in American society.

Vietnam coverage exposed government lies about war progress causing public distrust—the so-called ‘credibility gap.’ Journalists like Dan Rather became symbols of this era when they reported contrary facts from official statements, shaping public perception despite government pushback blaming media for anti-war sentiments.

A couple of security guards escorted Dan Rather out by his arms. He was punched in the stomach and considered it life-threatening. The incident, which happened inside a building where such aggression was unexpected, shocked onlookers and raised concerns about press safety during the 1968 Democratic National Convention.

Dan Rather later faced similar dangers when reporting on President Richard Nixon’s administration. His confrontations with Nixon were seen as bold journalism by some but angered others who supported Nixon.

The Netflix documentary highlights these moments, suggesting journalists like Rather shaped history through their confrontations with power. However, it also reveals biases within journalism itself – how stories are reported can be influenced by those providing information or pushing agendas.

Journalists often rely on leaks and official documents to avoid libel suits; they’re part of an industry that seeks to maximize its own importance. They may not always prioritize truth over interesting content; hence viewers should critically analyze news narratives considering the sources’ motives.

The film touches upon Watergate, illustrating how government institutions played a bigger role in exposing corruption than journalists did alone. This challenges the myth that reporters are solely responsible for uncovering scandals.

In conclusion, while journalists aim to inform the public, they operate within constraints and personal interests just like any other profession. The documentary suggests we should view news with awareness of these factors for a more accurate understanding of events.

Political activists may masquerade as journalists, their views shaped early by biology and upbringing. They seek power through journalism, driven to uncover newsworthy material even at personal risk.

Journalists are often liberals, craving fresh information and sometimes engaging in risky endeavors for a story. This hunger for news can lead them into dangerous situations without backup.

The Nixon presidency wasn’t toppled by the media but by Nixon’s mismanagement. Similarly, Donald Trump faced containment from established powers. Watergate was initially seen as minor political espionage but evolved into a symbol of corruption that threatened American values.

Jeffrey Alexander’s essay explains how society transformed Watergate from an insignificant event to a moral crisis over two years. The scandal became emblematic of systemic immorality within the government.

Initially dismissed by Americans and media alike, Watergate gained significance through elite-driven narratives framing it as an attack on national morals rather than mere politics. This shift turned it into a battle between good and evil in public perception.

CBS News faced pressure during this time; Dan Rather moved from covering the White House to joining “60 Minutes,” reflecting television’s blend of news with show business due to ratings pressures.

In reporting, credibility is paramount—whether covering protests or foreign conflicts like Afghanistan. Journalists must navigate risks to bring stories home while maintaining audience trust—a challenge exemplified in Rather’s career transition after Walter Cronkite’s retirement from CBS Evening News.

News has become intertwined with entertainment; however, integrity remains crucial for anchors who convey information to the public—a responsibility taken seriously despite inherent biases or limitations everyone faces when interpreting reality.

I recently watched the first two episodes of HBO’s “Small Town News,” a documentary about a local news team in Pahrump, Nevada. The series is set in a real workplace and follows the staff as they produce content for their station, KVPM. Reviews praise the show’s endearing characters who are easy to root for.

Despite its charm, I found myself feeling down after watching it. The thought of living in Pahrump—a small town with 36,000 residents near Las Vegas—struck me as bleak. It made me reflect on my own situation and whether I’d be willing to move somewhere like that just to be on TV or work at a small station.

The show also sparked thoughts about online content creators’ desperation for attention and validation through likes and subscriptions. It feels uncomfortable when someone seems overly eager for your approval.

However, there are those who genuinely have something valuable to share—like Professor Casey’s insightful videos on poultry—which doesn’t come across as desperate or depressing.

“Small Town News” features people who are comfortable with themselves and their roles within the community. They’re happy contributing however they can without seeking fame or recognition.

On another note, reading Peter Novick’s book “That Noble Dream” reminded me how historians sought objectivity post-World War II but often avoided controversial topics except when promoting racial equality or U.S. foreign policy power responsibilities—considered objective truths then.

In contrast, today’s media landscape includes debates over free speech versus hate speech regulations; this echoes past discussions around journalistic objectivity versus subjectivity.

Reflecting on my journey into journalism since 1979 has shown that striving for objectivity often meant simply echoing authority figures—an approach challenged by new journalism practices which emphasize personal perspective over bureaucratic reports.

Lastly, Dan Rather’s portrayal in a recent Netflix documentary highlighted his intense style compared to other anchors like Tom Brokaw and Peter Jennings during an era when network news dominated public discourse.

The desire to save and be saved often stems from the same unhealthy place. I learned this at a program for sex and love addiction, which explained that both impulses can come from problematic origins.

In 2016, F’s life was spiraling when she overdosed in Pasadena. Poe, who paid for the room, claimed he was just a family friend to the police.

Dan Rather’s Netflix documentary highlighted how early on media stories were crafted with ease. Paul P of The New York Times linked it to an official document by Pasadena Police Department. A TV network could cover global events if they invested enough money.

Live news became so influential that during coverage in Beijing, China decided to cut off satellite access – a significant moment for us journalists but also a black eye for Chinese authorities.

Journalism has evolved; once universally supporting free expression, intellectuals now debate what should be publicly discussed. Ronald Coase questioned why intellectuals support free idea markets yet oppose goods and services markets. This shift possibly began in the ’90s with political correctness rising alongside internet critiques by perceived inferiors.

Previously pro-freedom press resented new mediums like radio and TV news as competition arose. Once atop cultural high ground, some intellectuals felt threatened by free speech rather than protected by it – principles become secondary when power is gained.

Experts rely on peer recognition; their status rises through achievements acknowledged within their community circles—journalists lean on these experts to interpret reality.

A bizarre assault on Dan Rather left many skeptical about his story until evidence proved otherwise—a song even immortalized the incident later despite its serious nature initially being mocked or doubted.

When live interviews replace edited ones, control shifts away from journalists like Rather who struggled without editing leverage against George Bush during an Iran-Contra interview—highlighting journalism’s complex relationship with power dynamics.

Publicity has dual effects—it illuminates but also burns those under its intense focus constantly scrutinized or targeted for downfall—suggesting acting transparently reduces risks associated with fame or spotlight pressure since any missteps are never forgotten especially in politics where strategies play out long-term.

The left and right aren’t so different; we all manipulate events for our benefit. The American public doesn’t want to be told how to think, which led to the “We report, you decide” approach at Fox News. Still, networks like ABC and NBC are considered straight shooters by some, while CBS’s Dan Rather is seen as biased due to his dislike for George Bush.

In news media, having a villain helps drive a narrative. Roger Ailes of Fox News aimed to serve an audience he felt was overlooked. He created a channel that reflected his worldview with strong personalities driving ratings.

News often reflects bureaucratic statements rather than reality. For instance, recession indicators were evident when strippers in Manhattan noticed reduced tips long before official reports confirmed it. Bureaucratic sources are favored because they’re less likely to lead to lawsuits than individual insights—yet real-life experiences sometimes provide more accurate information.

Understanding news requires context: who wrote it, their ideology, agenda, incentives faced by them and their social circle’s expectations.

Fox News has been criticized by competitors but this is typical human behavior – people protect their status when threatened.

Journalism debates between traditional methods relying on official sources versus new journalism focusing on personal experience continue. Official declarations become ‘facts’, yet street corner comments can sometimes offer greater clarity or truth.

Finally, understanding power dynamics in society can be more enlightening than consuming sensationalist news that plays into biases without adding meaningful insight into complex issues.

Eating steak makes you full, much like consuming in-depth articles or books requires thought. News, however, is like junk food for the mind – easily digestible but not substantial. We’re starting to see how toxic it can be, similar to recognizing unhealthy foods years ago.

News focuses on sensational stories instead of underlying issues. It misleads us about real risks and priorities – terrorism seems more threatening than chronic stress; financial irresponsibility goes unnoticed while high-profile events grab attention.

Cutting news consumption entirely might be the only way to avoid its hazards. Daily news routines fill our heads with irrelevant information that seldom aids in making better life decisions.

News triggers stress responses and hinders deep thinking abilities. It’s a distraction system that affects memory and cognition negatively.

Moreover, excessive news watching fosters passivity by presenting problems we cannot influence, leading to pessimism and potentially contributing to depression and lack of creativity.

Journalistic ethics are complex due to their varied obligations – readers, sources, subjects of reporting, employers, advertisers all pull journalists in different directions. This complexity often leads to debates over what constitutes ethical journalism practice.

In summary: Overconsumption of news can be detrimental; it’s designed for quick consumption rather than deep understanding or relevance. Journalists face an intricate web of ethical considerations affecting their reporting quality and focus.

Culture, including music, TV, and books, shapes our worldview. Journalism is a powerful cultural force that helps us understand politics, empathize with others’ experiences, and grasp important public issues.

Dan Rather’s career at CBS News ended controversially due to a discredited report on President Bush’s National Guard service. He chose not to blame his team publicly to maintain the image of being more than just a newsreader. Despite this setback and the end of his high-profile job at CBS News—a role deeply tied to social status—Rather continued working in journalism even though his subsequent projects did not reach the same level of influence.

His post-CBS work didn’t capture national attention like before; stepping away from such prominence often means one can’t fully regain their former stature. Nevertheless, Rather persisted out of personal drive rather than retirement or defeat.

In summary, culture influences perception; journalism plays a key role in shaping it. Dan Rather faced career challenges but remained committed to journalistic work despite reduced impact after leaving CBS News.

Posted in Journalism | Comments Off on Decoding Dan Rather (5-12-24)

Private Government: How Employers Rule Our Lives (and Why We Don’t Talk about It)

Posted on May 12, 2024 by Luke Ford

Philosopher Elizabeth Anderson writes in this 2017 book:

* Walmart prohibits employees from exchanging casual remarks while on duty, calling this “time theft.” Apple inspects the personal belongings of their retail workers, who lose up to a half – hour of unpaid time every day as they wait in line to be searched. Tyson prevents its poultry workers from using the bathroom. Some have been forced to urinate on themselves, while their supervisors mock them. About half of U.S. employees have been subject to suspicionless drug screening by their employers. Millions are pressured by their employers to support particular political causes or candidates.

* Imagine a government that assigns almost everyone a superior whom they must obey. Although superiors give most inferiors a routine to follow, there is no rule of law. Orders may be arbitrary and can change at any time, without prior notice or opportunity to appeal. Superiors are unaccountable to those they order around. They are neither elected nor removable by their inferiors. Inferiors have no right to complain in court about how they are being treated, except in a few narrowly defined cases. They also have no right to be consulted about the orders they are given.

* It may prescribe a dress code and forbid certain hairstyles. Everyone lives under surveillance, to ensure that they are complying with orders. Superiors may snoop into inferiors’ e – mail and record their phone conversations. Suspicionless searches of their bodies and personal effects may be routine. They can be ordered to submit to medical testing. The government may dictate the language spoken and forbid communication in any other language. It may forbid certain topics of discussion. People can be sanctioned for their consensual sexual activity or for their choice of spouse or life partner. They can be sanctioned for their political activity and required to engage in political activity they do not agree with.

* Most workers in the United States are governed by communist dictatorships in their work lives. Usually, those dictatorships have the legal authority to regulate workers’ off – hour lives as well — their political activities, speech, choice of sexual partner, use of recreational drugs, alcohol, smoking, and exercise. Because most employers exercise this off – hours authority irregularly, arbitrarily, and without warning, most workers are unaware of how sweeping it is. Most believe, for example, that their boss cannot fire them for their off – hours Facebook postings, or for supporting a political candidate their boss opposes. Yet only about half of U.S. workers enjoy even partial protection of their off – duty speech from employer meddling. 3 Far fewer enjoy legal protection of their speech on the job, except in narrowly defined circumstances.

* Under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), employers may impose a 30 percent premium penalty on covered workers if they do not comply with employer – imposed wellness programs, which may prescribe exercise programs, diets, and abstinence from alcohol and other substances. In accordance with this provision, Penn State University recently threatened to impose a $100 per month surcharge on workers who did not answer a health survey that included questions about their marital situation, sexual conduct, pregnancy plans, and personal finances. 13 In other cases, employer authority over workers’ off – duty lives is implicit, a by – product of the employment – at – will rule: since employers may fire workers for any or no reason, they may fire them for their sexual activities, partner choice, or any other choice workers think of as private from their employer, unless the state has enacted a law specifically forbidding employer discrimination on these grounds.

* Most workers are hired without any negotiation over the content of the employer’s authority, and without a written or oral contract specifying any limits to it. If they receive an employee handbook indicating such limits, the inclusion of a simple disclaimer (which is standard practice) is sufficient to nullify any implied contract exception to at – will employment in most states. 18 No wonder they are shocked and outraged when their boss fires them for being too attractive, 19 for failing to show up at a political rally in support of the boss’s favored political candidate, 20 even because their daughter was raped by a friend of the boss. 21

* Under the employment – at – will baseline, workers, in effect, cede all of their rights to their employers, except those specifically guaranteed to them by law, for the duration of the employment relationship.

* …managers have numerous other sanctions at their disposal besides firing and suing: they can and often do demote employees; cut their pay; assign them inconvenient hours or too many or too few hours; assign them more dangerous, dirty, menial, or grueling tasks; increase their pace of work; set them up to fail; and, within very broad limits, humiliate and harass them.

* Noncompete clauses, which bar employees from working for other employers in the same industry for a period of years, have spread from technical professions (where nearly half of employees are subject to them) to jobs such as sandwich maker, pesticide sprayer, summer camp counselor, and hairstylist. 41 While employers can no longer hold workers in bondage, they can imprison workers’ human capital. California is one of the few states that prohibit noncompete clauses.

Tyler Cowan responds:

I believe also that a business usually should have the right to fire a worker for Facebook postings or other forms of “outside the workplace” activity. For a start, a lot of workers put racist, sexist, or otherwise discomforting comments and photos into their Facebook pages. When employers fire them, very often it is to protect some notion of the freedom of the other workers . As I read Anderson, usually she frames the issues in terms of the employer versus the workers. But through markets, employers very often are internalizing the preferences of the workers as a whole. The question of workplace freedom often boils down to one set of the workers against another. In that setting, allowing for a lot of apparently arbitrary firing decisions on net may support rather than oppose worker autonomy.
Overall, I find the perspective of the employer and also the perspective of the customer to be lacking in her essay…

* Large numbers of employers go out of their way to make their companies sources of worker dignity, precisely because workers and potential workers value such freedoms and protections. The more your company is viewed positively, the easier it is to recruit talented workers.

* unemployment has major negative effects on happiness and health, far beyond what the lost income otherwise would induce. Does this not indicate that workplaces, overall, are significant sources of human dignity and fulfillment in today’s capitalist world? …The desire to attract and keep talent is the single biggest reason why companies try to create pleasant and tolerant atmospheres for their workers, and why it is rare for businesses to fire workers for their political views or their (nondestructive) off – premises activities.

* I would note that under today’s American “rule of law,” if interpreted literally, the average American commits about three felonies each day (for instance, throwing out junk mail addressed to somebody else is a federal crime punishable with up to five years in prison). 7 Of course, most of us get off scot – free for these and many other crimes. I do think we should clear away many of these laws, but in the meantime they reflect a broader point: just about all workable systems rely on embedded incentives to make them tolerable. In this case, there is very little incentive to prosecute each American for three felonies each day.

* I would ask for a closer look at company bargains with labor unions, co – ops owned and run by their workers, and worker – managed firms. Overall, the literature shows that these structures do not offer significantly greater freedom for workers, at least not in the sense that Anderson describes. One reason is that these organizational structures often are less efficient, and that interferes with their ability to give workers a better deal. Another mechanism is that when workers can get a better deal, they often prefer to take cash rather than extra freedoms or perks. Different organizational forms therefore do not seem to be a significant answer to the problems of workplace freedom, nor are unions.

* Anderson mentions the German codetermination model, whereby workers sit on the boards of corporations. The best study I know indicates that this organizational form costs about 26 percent of shareholder value because of lower productivity, 10 and furthermore a lot of that burden is born by consumers, who of course are mostly workers in another guise. And that result is for Germany, the country where this organizational model probably has been most successful. Furthermore, the codetermination model works best for midlevel manufacturing firms — which are prevalent in Germany — but does not generalize as easily to the service sector, where most workers may have less of a stake in the long – run interests of the firm.

Posted in Work | Comments Off on Private Government: How Employers Rule Our Lives (and Why We Don’t Talk about It)

My Stormy Daniels Interviews

Posted on May 10, 2024 by Luke Ford

I posted this 2003-02-14 16:26:32:

I’ve seen Wicked Pictures contract girl Stormy Daniels many times over the past six months, always in the company of her boyfriend Brad Armstrong, Wicked director and performer.

At the Seymore Butts – Showtime party Thursday night, 2/13/03, I speak to Stormy for the first time. I find out she doesn’t bite.

MikeSouth.com reports: “A number of people clled me and told me they were surprised to see, in attendance, none other than Stormy Daniels and Brad Armstrong. Funny thing about Brad, it seems he is the most hated person in porn, even the name Regan Senter doesn’t draw the visceral reactions that Brad Armstrongs name does. Stormy, as I understand it is pretty likeable, but around Brad she walks on eggshells.”

Luke says: I’ve never heard anyone say a bad word about Brad.

Stormy says she spent $800 on Brad Armstrong’s Valentine’s Day present. The couple were late here tonight because Brad was out shopping for something for Stormy.

As I repeat her info into my tape recorder, Stormy says, “Shut up, he can hear you.” I look over to see Brad ten feet away.

Aria, munching cucumbers, warns Stormy to be careful of what she says to me.

Aria: “We should have Luke come to your birthday party.”

Stormy: “I know nothing about the birthday party.”

Luke: “When is it?”

Aria: “None of your business.”

Stormy: “St. Patrick’s Day.”

Luke: “How old will you be?”

Stormy: “24.”

Jessica Drake and Aria are on the birthday committee.

Luke: “Would you like me to jump out of a cake?”

Aria: “Naked?”

Luke: “No.”

Aria: “We’re holding auditions for a male stripper.”

Stormy says she gets crazy when the seven of them hang out (Aria, Stormy, Jessica, Monique Alexander, Dolorian, etc).

Luke: “Do you get intoxicated?”

Aria: “We bring a limo. We don’t drive. Of course if we’re in a limo we’re going to be intoxicated.”

Luke: “Do you like to drink in the mornings before you go to work on set?”

Aria: “No, I do not. Nobody drinks before movies. Nobody does drugs. Nobody even smokes weed in this business because we’re all pure and sweet and innocent except we like to spread out legs…”

Luke to Stormy: “How do you feel about turning 24?”

Stormy: “I want to cry. I cried last year.”

Luke: “Good cry or bad cry?”

Stormy: “Bad cry.”

Luke: “How will you feel about turning 30?”

Stormy: “I’ll be dead by then. Porno years are like dog years. I figure I will be dead by then.”

Luke: “You look great. You have’t aged yet.”

Stormy: “Yet. I used to say stripper years were like dog years. Porn years are more like gerbil years.”

Luke: “Brad’s maintained his good looks.”

Stormy: “Brad’s almost old enough to be my daddy.”

Stormy started stripping at age 17.

Luke: “Can you strip at 17?”

Stormy: “Not legally.”

Luke: “Where were you?”

Stormy: “Louisianna.”

Luke: “You can do that in Louisianna.”

Stormy: “They don’t bother to check your IDs.”

Luke: “Did you ever date family member?”

Stormy: “Not knowingly.”

From Baton Rouge, Stormy usually tells people she’s from New Orleans, because most people have not heard of Baton Rouge.

Luke: “How do you like LA?”

Stormy: “I like it. I miss the food.”

Luke: “The hospitality.”

Stormy: “The people are so horrible in traffic here. They won’t let you over. Guys don’t hold doors open for you. The first month I was here, I kept walking into doors. I’d go in behind a guy and I’d expect him to hold it open and he wouldn’t. I’d walk right into it. They don’t say ‘Yes mam,’ and ‘No mam,’ and they don’t say ‘Thank you.'”

Luke: “Were you surprised by the porn industry or was it what you expected?”

Stormy: “I was surprised. The people are nicer than I expected. I know there’s a dark side too but I thought it would be all dark side. There are lots of normal families.”

Luke: “Does it bother you how few relationships seem to last in this industry?”

Stormy: “Yeah, of course it does. You can’t help but apply it to yourself.”

Luke: “Does it bother you that Brad works on camera with other girls aside from you?”

Stormy: “Of course it does. I don’t believe it when people say it doesn’t bother them. If it doesn’t bother you at all, then you’re not into your relationship.”

Luke: “Does it bother him that you do other guys?”

Stormy: “I hope so. He’s been working on camera for over ten years.”

Luke: “Does it bother you how many porn star girlfriends he’s had?”

Stormy: “Who else would he date?”

Luke: “He’s been with the most beautiful women in the industry – Jenna Jameson, Dyanna Lauren, Alexa, Kira Kener, Stephanie Swift…”

Stormy: “That’s annoying. It doesn’t bother me that they were porn stars. You date what you’re around. They all seem to still like him. They still call him if they need something and they’re all nice to me.”

Luke: “How does your family feel?”

Stormy: “I don’t have a family. My Mom knows what I do. She watches the softcore versions and she has all my magazines.”

Luke: “Is she proud? Embarrassed?”

Stormy: “She’s proud. She’ll tell other people, ‘Here’s my baby,’ and pull out a layout of me with Brad.”

Luke: “If you had to choose between being happily married or a porn star, which would you choose?”

Stormy: “I’d have to choose happily married. Not married. Happily married. It’s a Catch 22.”

Luke: “So how close are you guys to getting married?”

Stormy: “You’re asking the wrong person.”

Luke: “Are you ready to get married?”

Stormy: “I guess so. We’ve been living together for nine months. If he asked me, I’d say yes, if that’s what you’re asking.”

Luke: “Would you like to have kids?”

Stormy: “I never ever wanted to have kids until I met Brad. It’s funny because that’s one of the reasons some of my past relationships did not work out – I hate kids. And the guy always liked them. Brad doesn’t want kids.”

Luke: “How did you meet Aria?”

Stormy: “On set of Making It. I met her five minutes before I met Brad. I came to LA with a friend (Devon Michaels) who was doing a scene in Brad’s movie. We went to dinner and I moved in with Brad the next day.

“I rode the [mechanical] bull on our first date [at a bar on Sunset Blvd].”

Aria: “We both have records for not falling off that damn thing.”

Stormy: “At least a mechanical bull won’t stomp on you.”

I look at Stormy’s arm where she was stomped by her horse Silhouette six months ago. It’s a big dark patch.

Stormy has three horses in Los Angeles.

Luke: “Has your mother met Brad?”

Stormy: “I wouldn’t do that to him.”

Aria: “Are you going to tell him about your mother or (looking at me) is that none of your damn business?”

Luke: “Do you have good relations with your mother?”

Stormy, an only child: “We get along. She knows what I do.”

Luke: “What about your father?”

Stormy: “I haven’t seen him since I was 16.”

Luke: “Would you like to?”

Stormy: “No. Before that, I only saw him once a year since I was four.”

Aria: “She puts on the best feature act [strip routine] in the business.”

Aria and Stormy coo over Jessica Drake’s slender form.

As a guy, I don’t always look my conversation partner in the face but instead stare out impassively.

Aria: “Luke’s in a zone, staring out over the crowd, hoping that we will talk about something that’s none of his damn business.”

Luke: “So what could you tell me that would most surprise the people at Wicked?”

Aria: “You don’t want to.”

Stormy: “They know everything. I’m there every day. I hang out in the office. They know all the good stuff and all the bad stuff.”

Luke: “What do you love and what do you hate about the industry?”

Stormy: “I guess the obvious, the same as everybody else. I love being in front of the camera. I love being a star and feeling beautiful. The money of course. If it wasn’t for the industry, I wouldn’t have met Brad or Aria or Jessica. I have way better friends here than I ever did back home. The sex is hit and miss. Sometimes it’s good and sometimes it’s bad.

“The bad stuff is that it makes you as a woman feel depressed and insecure. It makes you aware of your age. There’s always somebody coming along who’s younger and more beautiful. While a guy might have 20 years to make all his money [performing in porn], we have eight years max. You’ve got a lot of stuff to cram in there.”

Luke: “The industry preys on people’s insecurities.”

Stormy: “Absolutely. I could name you ten of my friends in Louisianna who should go see a plastic surgeon but the thought never crossed their mind. I could name ten of my friends [in Los Angeles] who are absolutely flawless and they have a couple of things they want to see a plastic surgeon about.

“I’m really afraid of catching something [STD] to the point that I’m really anal about it. Some people think that I am a whiner on set because I am like, ‘One hand for you and one hand for me’ type thing. My kids will thank me one day.

“Wicked is condom-mandatory. I’m allergic to condoms. I can only use one brand. It was a lot of trial and error to find the one brand and the one lube I could use. Otherwise it feels like I am having sex with a hot poker.”

Stormy can’t say the brand she uses because it’s not the brand Wicked endorses. Through other sources, I learn she uses Crown condoms and Eros lube.

Stormy: “I did 28-scenes before I signed with Wicked, but probably eight of them were for Wicked. I’v done almost 40 scene sin my career. My contract calls for me to do seven movies a year. I might do three scenes in a movie.”

Stormy has only had plastic surgery on her breasts, getting saline implants four years ago. “I used to think I looked all right but now I’m conscious of every little flaw.”

Luke: “What’s Brad’s attitude towards you and plastic surgery?”

Stormy: “The problem with Brad is that he is brutally honest. If I ask him, ‘Should I fix this?’ He’ll say, ‘Yeah, that would be an improvement.’ That was hard for me because I’m used to being with guys who say, ‘Oh God, I think you are the most beautiful thing in the whole world.’ But he’s always right. He doesn’t say it to mean because you never know when there will be people like you lurking around.

“He’s usually right about everything. He’ll tell me, ‘Oh, you should change into that.’ I look at it on the rack and say, ‘There’s no way I’m going to wear that.’ Then I put it on and wear it to an event and everybody is falling over themselves to compliment me.”

Luke: “How does a straight man have such a good eye?”

Stormy: “That’s what I want to know. Maybe he was a drag queen in a past life.”

Luke: “Have you ever caught him with another man?”

Stormy: “No, and I’ve tried to catch him too. He’s probably the only guy in the business who doesn’t have some sort of gay somewhere.”

Luke: “Have friends from high school gotten in touch with you?”

Stormy: “I only had one friend through high school. We were going in different directions before I came here. I came straight into stripping and magazines and feature dancing and she went straight into college and sorority things. She knows what I do. She’s not a fan. She doesn’t watch it and she doesn’t like to hear about it. But she never says anything. She accepts it but she doesn’t like it.”

Luke: “How come you only had one friend in high school?”

Stormy: “Because I was so ugly nobody else would talk to me. They barked at me when I crossed the stage at graduation.”

Luke: “I don’t understand. How did you look different then?”

Stormy: “I haven’t changed except I got my boobs done and I changed my hair.”

Luke: “Do you think that you got into the sex industry to prove to yourself that you are sexy?”

Stormy: “Could be. It had something to do with the euphoria I felt the first time I went on stage [to take her clothes off]. Men throwing money at me. It had more of an impact on me than hanging out with the popular cheerleaders.”

Luke: “How old were you when you lost your virginity?”

Stormy: “Thirteen. It was a good experience. I was with the same guy until I was 17. He was my age.”

Luke: “What clique did you hang out with in high school?”

Stormy: “Me and my friend. I was a journalist. Everyone hated me. I was the editor of my high school newspaper in my Senior year. I was also 4-H president. No wonder nobody liked me.”

Luke: “Did you write any scandalous stories?”

Stormy: “Yeah, but they always made me change it. I’d rather write a short story than an article. I have notebooks and notebooks of stories. I published some short stories in high school.”

Luke: “What was your high school GPA?”

Stormy: “I went to a magnet school so it was a 3.5. But if I went to a regular school, it would’ve been counted as a 4.0. If I started college now, I’d start as a sophomore. In my Senior year of high school, I took physics, French 5 and chemistry. I got a 29 on my ACT. I never went to college.”

Luke: “Do you work with black guys?”

Stormy stiffens: “No.”

I’m touching on a touchy subject.

Luke: “And the reason is?”

Stormy: “I’m from the South. I’m not racist. My roadie when I travel is black. He stays in my hotel room on the road. My Mom has been so cool with everyone I’ve done, why throw the one thing in her face?”

Luke: “How much time do you spend on the road?”

Stormy: “One week a month.”

Luke: “What books have you read in the past year?”

Stormy: “I haven’t read a whole lot. I’m embarrassed to say that. I read more non-fiction, how-to books about horses. I love those Chicken Soup for the Soul books. After every story, I bawl like a bitch, and then move on to the next one.”

Luke: “Has being in this industry and dancing affected your view of men?”

Stormy: “Yes. I’m better in this industry than I was when I was in the strip club every night. Because when you are in a strip club every night, you see nothing but the bad sides of men. I’m not saying every guy I talk to in a club is like that. I”ve met some cool guys. But for every cool guy you meet, you meet 20 who are trying to get their wedding ring off and telling you sh–. When all you see is the bad side it’s hard not to carry that into your personal life.”

Luke: “So what have you done?”

Stormy: “I try to remember that everybody is an individual and every situation is different. But it’s so hard to do.”

Luke: “What would you be doing if you had never become a dancer?”

Stormy: “A veterinarian or a writer.”

Luke: “Do you think you could go back to college and do that?”

Stormy: “Sure. I’m smart enough. Would I? I don’t know.”

Luke: “What did you think of the Primetime special on Belladonna?”

Stormy: “I didn’t see it but I read about it on the internet. I think she was represented unfairly. I’m sure that for every bad thing she said, she said ten good things. Everything has pros and cons. They always show the cons. Did I understand where she was coming from when she was crying and saying how it makes her feel? Absolutely. There have been days when I’ve felt like that. When I had a horrible day on set and I didn’t like the guy I had to work with and the director yelled at me. I hurt. I had cramps. I didn’t want to be there. If you’re bloated and cramping and self conscious and you’ve got to f— somebody and look like you like it, of course you are going to hate what you are doing. That’s any job you have. You’re not human if it doesn’t affect you. You’re not human if you never ask yourself, ‘What am I doing here?’

“I can totally understand what she said but she probably should’ve been more careful in what she said knowing that that’s probably what they were going to air. I agree with some of the stuff she said but I think it was stupid of her to say it… I love my job. I’m good at lots of other things. There are days when I don’t like my job, but for any day I don’t like it, there are 50 that I love it.”

Luke: “Who are your closest friends in the industry?”

Stormy: “Aria, Jessica Drake, Nicole Sheridan, Barrett [Moore, boyfriend of DP contract girl Devon]. When they were split up, we talked a lot.”

Luke: “It’s sad that no relationship lasts in this industry.”

Stormy: “They’re back together. I think they’re going to be ok. It was sad. Even when we were hanging out, I knew he really loved her.

“I can’t believe that Brad doesn’t come over here and get you away from me. I’m probably going to get yelled at [for speaking to me].”

Posted in Pornography | Comments Off on My Stormy Daniels Interviews

‘You’ll Only Learn Through Pain’

Posted on May 10, 2024 by Luke Ford

When my father saw that I was stuck in some self-destructive pattern and I wouldn’t listen to him, he’d often say to me, “Life is going to have some hard lessons for you. Perhaps you’ll only learn through pain.”

He was right. Life had some hard lessons for me and I mainly learned through pain.

The number one lesson I learned from life was that the 90-10-10 (carbs, fat, protein) vegetarian diet my father espoused was a disaster. Unfortunately, I only learned this in my 50s when I was too entrenched in my vegetarianism to change.

In June of 2021, I found beef organ capsules and all of my health problems went away in two weeks.

The number two lesson I learned from life was that I had untreated ADHD. I got this diagnosis in October of 2023 and within minutes of going on Adderall, my ADHD was effectively managed.

My father believed that the number one lesson I needed to learn in life was that Jesus Christ was my personal savior. This is one lesson I never learned. However, I did embrace God and Judaism in my 20s, but found that this solved almost nothing beyond my need for meaning.

My father called me out for insisting, without evidence, that I always knew better. He also detested my attention-seeking. In these two ways, we were terrifically alike. We both needed to be the star of the room and we both used hyperbole to get it.

Unlike my father, I had no stomach for the tedious tasks of life. “You have to take responsibility,” my parents would lecture me when failed repeatedly in life’s basics (including homework). I got fired from every job I held between 12 and 17 (about six) and earned mediocre grades at school. I lacked diligence and attention to detail in all things lacking excitement. At age 57, I was prescribed Adderall which made this problem go away.

To cope with the shame of repeated failure, I developed a hyperbolic sense of myself that was later diagnosed as narcissistic personality disorder. My father thought my fundamental problems were moral and theological. They turned out to be biochemical.

A Seventh Day Adventist Bible scholar wrote to me in 1998:

You father “knows” too much for me to tell him anything. Including about you. It will never happen.

…Knowing too much, summarizing too fast, summing up too quickly, is a weakness he has. It’s a way that you and he are terrifically alike.

…By the way, you enjoy controversy and driving people nuts way too much. Both of you. What is the blessing in “Blessed are the peacemakers.” (Jesus knew at least as much about Judaism as you do….) Part of what makes you ill at ease in the self/world dichotomy is this approach toward the outside world as the enemy to be debunked.

Hiding behind “journalism” as the reason for this cynicism just won’t do. I ain’t convinced! There are lots of “journalists” who do have the same problem with their approach, but there are lots that don’t. It’s not endemic to journalism to have to drive people nuts, to be cynical, and to print what MAY be someone’s screwup and assume it’s true until proven otherwise. The theory of the law, “Innocent until proven guilty” would help in your approach to your journalism. But of course you became this sort of journalist as a result of an already existing cynicism, not the reverse. You have charm and intelligence and good looks, and I can see that it is dangerously easy for you to mislead people about yourself–even when you know you’re doing it. Careful, this can make for a hollow feeling and dis-ease.

…Now, what your father [two Ph.Ds in Christianity] was exposed to was “readings” in the British style. Not the original materials, but readings of not-very-good European writers, whose writings couldn’t even be taken seriously (since they’re relatively ignorant of the details) in American Biblical Studies. Out of this study of generally poor secondary sources your father got the impression he was something of an expert in theology. From this weak background, with most of his questions unanswered, he launched into doing what only someone who didn’t know what he didn’t know would do: he tried to write a commentary on Daniel. It was a terrible mishmash of preterism, historicism, and futurism without any understanding of how these systems complement and clash. There was no understanding of their history, of the sameness and difference involved in them.. And much of the book was unedited quotes from other sources strung together in ways that didn’t fit at all. It became apparent to me after only a few minutes that your father didn’t have the foggiest notion of the Book of Daniel, and shouldn’t even be teaching an academy class on the subject, much less writing a book about it. That a Seventh Day Adventist publishing house published this mess, virtually unedited, and with even the Hebrew title screwed up, showed the blind leading the blind.

You write very much in the style of your father. Like him, you tie together long quotes, with rather poor segues and transitions. This is so evident in your website that I marvel that I didn’t get it sooner. And you’ve gotten the same kind of accurate and strong criticism your father got for what passes for writing. And the same kind of “this guy really didn’t take the time to know what he was talking about before he became a legend in his own mind” criticism.

Here are more of my childhood traits that brought out my father’s “you might only learn through pain” line:

* I couldn’t stick to anything that did not have immediate rewards.
* Using work time to do my own thing such as talk to girls.
* I mouthed off to teachers and bosses who retaliated.
* I tried to dominate and take over every group I joined.
* I talked too much. I interrupted people. I blurted out things inappropriate. I didn’t care who I offended with my opinions. I was born to blog.
* I talked to girls like I talked to boys.
* I was desperate to show people how smart I was.
* I thought the rules didn’t apply to me because I was special.
* Trying to get away with stuff.
* Leading a hidden life hoping it wouldn’t get exposed.
* A selfish life wouldn’t make me happy.
* Over-exertion such as running marathons at age 12 and working 90-hours a week at age 19. “You’ll spend your health to get your wealth and vainly spend your wealth to get your health,” dad said.

Posted in Personal | Comments Off on ‘You’ll Only Learn Through Pain’

Decoding The Violence Problem In LA Public Transport (5-9-24)

Posted on May 9, 2024 by Luke Ford

01:00 Column: They want to ride buses and trains, but they’re afraid. For riders old and young, Metro must be safer, https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-05-09/they-want-to-ride-buses-and-trains-but-theyre-afraid-for-riders-old-and-young-metro-must-be-safer
29:00 WSJ: Rising Crime Rates Are a Policy Choice: Progressives can’t solve the problem because they won’t abandon the practices that cause it. https://www.wsj.com/articles/safe-streets-are-a-policy-choice-incapacitation-incarceration-state-federal-prison-violent-crime-1990s-reagan-bush-barr-obama-sentencing-bail-11666785403
34:00 TNR: Can We Become a Country of “Joiners”? A new documentary explores Robert Putnam’s life and work., https://newrepublic.com/article/180516/robert-putnam-documentary-country-joiners
42:00 Elliott Blatt joins
48:00 What’s going to turn around our back direction on crime?
1:05:30 Robert Putnam on Immigration and Diversity
1:10:00 Political Scientist: Does Diversity Really Work?, https://www.npr.org/2007/08/15/12802663/political-scientist-does-diversity-really-work

Posted in Los Angeles | Comments Off on Decoding The Violence Problem In LA Public Transport (5-9-24)