Sunday, January 31, 2010

SAG Moves towards Joint Bargaining with AFTRA

The SAG National Board yesterday passed a resolution, by a surprising 82% to 18% vote, directing the guild’s president and National Executive Director to “seek engagement with AFTRA in a joint bargaining agreement for negotiation of the Television/Theatrical Contract,” as quoted in a SAG press release. This move is as I predicted in a blog post three weeks ago, based on conversations then with a confidential source.

Those negotiations, scheduled for October 1 – November 15 of this year, would take place “under the terms of Phase One, modeled on the agreement used successfully in the 2009 Commercials Contract negotiations,” per the resolution. Phase One is the 1981 agreement between the two unions under which they have jointly bargained with the studios for almost three decades, with the notable exception of 2007-2009.

The margin was unexpected, since the board is almost evenly divided between factions that support joint bargaining (Unite for Strength and an independent in Los Angeles, and most or all members of the New York and regional boards) and a group (Membership First) that has generally expressed bitter opposition to joint bargaining under Phase One, a framework that gives SAG and AFTRA equal weight on the negotiating committee. (Because of the lateness of the hour, it was not possible to explore this issue with sources, and a call to a SAG spokesperson was not immediately returned.)

The resolution also directs the President, Ken Howard, and National Executive Director, David White, to “bring a recommendation to the National Board at the earliest opportunity.” The urgency presumably stems in part from the fact that AFTRA’s next national board meeting is February 27 meeting, and more generally from the constraints created by the October 1 date and the various processes leading up to it, as I have previously discussed. The TV/theatrical contract doesn’t expire until June 30, 2011, but the agreement reached last year between the studios and SAG mandates early bargaining, specifically, from October 1 through November 15.

The SAG press release is below.


Subscribe to my blog ( for more about entertainment law and digital media law. Go to the blog itself to subscribe via RSS or email. Or, follow me on Twitter, friend me on Facebook, or subscribe to my Huffington Post articles. If you work in tech, check out my book How to Write LOIs and Term Sheets.


SAG National Board of Directors Meets via
Videoconference in Los Angeles and New York

Los Angeles, (January 31, 2010) - Screen Actors Guild National Board of Directors voted today to seek engagement with AFTRA in a joint bargaining agreement for negotiation of the Television/Theatrical Contract. Approved 82 to 18 percent, the resolution states:

“It was moved and seconded that in light of SAG's historically productive negotiating partnership with AFTRA, the SAG National Board of Directors directs President Ken Howard and National Executive Director David White to seek engagement with AFTRA in a joint bargaining agreement for negotiation of the Television/Theatrical Contract, under the terms of Phase One, modeled on the agreement used successfully in the 2009 Commercials Contract negotiations. President Howard and NED White shall bring a recommendation to the National Board at the earliest opportunity.”

Screen Actors Guild President Ken Howard said, “I am very pleased with the vote and thank the Board for their leadership and foresight on this important issue. I so appreciate the Board’s cooperative spirit in this discussion and throughout the day, and feel confident that our Guild is moving in the right direction.”

In other actions, the National Board voted unanimously to create a National Performance Capture Committee to address the unique concerns and experiences of members who render performances that are recorded using “performance capture” technology across all media, and to advise the Guild on all matters pertaining to work in this rapidly growing area.

The board also approved 83 percent to 17 percent the unanimous recommendation of the finance committee to authorize the extension of existing initiation fee reductions in targeted markets across the country and to have the Guild’s Joint Strategic Planning and Finance Committee review the initiation fee structure nationwide.

The national board received reports from elected leadership and staff including:

• President Howard memorialized those members who have passed away over the last year reading each name aloud and calling for a moment of silent remembrance. Howard also recognized the recent loss of former Houston Branch President and board member Jim Huston, who passed away January 28, 2010.

Mary McDonald-Lewis, Regional Branch Division board member from Portland, Oregon, delivered a special tribute to Huston, saying, “He stood with his brothers and sisters through the best of times and the worst of times, and did so with resolve.“

• Secretary-Treasurer Amy Aquino delivered a report on the Guild’s second quarter financial results noting that SAG’s revenue and expenses are closely tracking the projections for fiscal year 2010. Aquino also provided an update on investment performance indicating recoupment of certain losses in the Guild’s investment portfolio when compared to the prior year.

• National Executive Director David White reported on the strategic planning efforts underway at the Guild and preparation for negotiations. White updated the board on new institutional and member service initiatives including a revitalized organizing strategy and program. White applauded SAG committee members and staff for their innovative and thoughtful work in key areas including the 2010 SAG Awards, government relations and legislative activities, new media outreach activities, and the LifeRaft Live Streaming partnership with SAG Foundation, among other efforts.

The Board also appointed Deputy National Executive Director of Contracts Ray Rodriguez to the Screen Actors Guild-Producers Industry Advancement & Cooperative Fund (IACF) board and addressed a number of governance matters, including a constitutional amendment regarding written assent procedures; an amendment to Branch rules of procedure; advisory recommendations from the annual national membership meeting; amendments to the election guidelines; and a recommendation to study the feasibility of electronic voting.

The meeting adjourned just after 5:00 p.m. PST.


  1. Love this, I'm posting it on my blog as well, Thanks for the great info, Suede Management

  2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  3. Oh must we, Matt?

    You are assuming everything, have facts on nothing and an utter bore is the result.

  4. Last year over 80% of the new primetime pilots were AFTRA. It looks like this year is running even more in AFTRA's favor. Be careful, Mattie, that proportional representation argument might not be exactly what you think it is.

  5. Mr. Mulhern - would you prefer SAG to bargain on its own and not woth AFTRA?

    If you favor joint bargaining, do you think that SAG still has an such an overwhelming percentage of TV work that it entitles them to an advantageous position over AFTRA?

    If your answer to both of the above questions is NO, then what is your problem with the way things are now?

  6. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  7. Speaking of "harsh" - it seems you weren't treated to karmic kickback harsh enough to dissuade you from believing that you were right during your recent firing from a stageplay and everybody else (all others in the cast included) was wrong.

    Seems like you'll continue to feel "fucked" (as you put it) until you Wake Up.

    Also, your views on SAG and its politcal situation is constantly and unchangingly angry and somewhat constipated in its lack of movement. Seems like you need a harsh laxative.

  8. Yes Sir, Anonymous. Matt needs a really good "physic" as my dear old mother used to say.

    We all know he's too "backed up" for it to do any good, but at least we talk true.

    Thanks for your great post, Anonymous. Gave me great laugh.

    Matt, the drug store has some pretty good products for "relaxation" of the...well you know. NOT that it will do any good.

    Hey, we can try, can't we comrades?

  9. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  10. That bit about SAG being "left hanging" when Phase One broke down - precisely where is the alternate universe where this happened, Mulhern? Everyone on this side of your time-space wormhole remembers that SAG demanded and got to go first with the AMPTP, then got an extension, and then got another one when they said they were "hours away" from a settlement. Only when that turned out not to be true did AFTRA negotiate with the producers.

    And now you suggest that "resentment and bile" is the reason why SAG should lead the negotiations? Wow.

    I will bow to your experience with "karmic justice," however. The New York Times said you were fired because you couldn't learn your lines, and you and I know the Times never, ever gets anything wrong, don't we, Mattie?

    Karma, you're soaking in it.


  11. Dear Fred, don't forget it was the Producers not AFTRA that decided "enough" and went to AFTRA. SAG went before AFTRA (taking AFTRA's courtesy) and yes, SAG got two additional extensions.

    AMPTP, not being anywhere close to the "deal" that D.Allen falsely reported being "hours away" needed to move on down the line.

    AFTRA had no choice since AMPTP basically said, "SAG can't negotiate, doesn't know how to negotiate, time is clicking by and we need a deal." Enter AFTRA.

    I agree with you Fred, the NY Times never gets anything wrong. Even about "feathers" being ruffled. Maybe that was an understatment?

    Fred's post is on point, as always. Mulhern is off in space, as always.

  12. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  13. Wow.

    I have to admit, you certainly sound like someone who has been able to move beyond the New York Times reporting in a front page story that you were fired for unprofessional behavior. Good for you.

    As for the rest of your screed, let's avoid dealing with the smokescreen you've raised and focus on your poor grasp of history, like my initial comment. SAG wasn't "left hanging." It negotiated first and failed to come up with a settlement. THEN, and only THEN, did AFTRA negotiate a deal, and when they did, it had higher rates than SAG. Even you will have to admit that becoming the higher priced union is a strange tactic to take if you're looking to "grab" shows.

    There's a problem with your reliance on proportionality, Mattie. It isn't as prevalent in real life as you claim it is. When it comes to voting on contracts, like TV/Theatrical, there is no weighted voting. Every SAG member gets the same vote, whether or not they work the contract. You really can't start arguing that some voters are more important than other voters until you acknowledge that that rule should apply across the board, rather than just when it suits you.

    You want to be an advocate of proportionality? That's swell. I know some good people who are. All you have to do is accept its applicability across the board. Proportionality based on work load? It sounds a lot like affected voting.

    Doesn't it?

    But there I go again, expecting logic and consistency to apply when you start talking.

    And please forgive me for suggesting that you were offering resentment and bile as a reason to support giving SAG a majority say in negotiations. When you said "Of course, proportionality has shifted a bit. But the resentment and bile of getting reamed by your former partner of 27 years over some bullshit "sleights" lives on," I thought you meant "Of course, proportionality has shifted a bit. But the resentment and bile of getting reamed by your former partner of 27 years over some bullshit "sleights" lives on." My mistake was obvious, and I apologize.

  14. Every single person engaged with the stage plays that Matt Mulhern was fired from will attest to the fact of his unprofessional behavior. Ask any one of them.

  15. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  16. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  17. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  18. The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

  19. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  20. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  21. Mattie,

    The Times said you got fired for unprofessional behavior and that's all that really matters, isn't it? The paper of record and all that? You used to be fond of quoting the Times. Now you aren't. That's karma, kiddo, with a Kapital K.

    You can keep claiming that AFTRA "voluntarily" left Phase One, and, even if it were true, it doesn't make you any more correct when you claim that SAG was "left hanging" when SAG negotiated first and couldn't close the deal. Fault for that lies completely with the clueless SAG negotiators who said they were "hours from settlement" but weren't. All the anguished screaming about Phase One doesn't make that go away.

    You now claim that AFTRA's pickup of a majority of last year's pilots was because AFTRA bargained separately even though the AFTRA contract costs the producers more, and pays those middle class actors more than the SAG contract. It may well be that separating itself early from the truly hapless SAG negotiation strategy (we're actors, we deserve more! And we'll swagger til we get it!) helped producers distinguish between a professional union and a bunch of self-destructive egomaniacs pretending to be labor leaders. Maybe you're right about that.

    I do want to ask you about one of your predictions about that contract, Mattie. Remember when you said that the major producers were just waiting for the ink to dry on the contract to flood the world with productions made under that "non-union" space in the new media terms?

    How did that work out?

  22. Look, Mulhern - who in the hell would want to put up with your litigious ass just to make a public statement?

    Answer: no one.

    So can it, loser. No one is going to confront you. No need to. You provide your own war - the war within yourself.


    Rant and rave to your heart's content - no one believes you. No one gets fired for "nothing."

    People get fired because they can't do the job. Because they're disruptive to the creative process. Because no one wants to work with them.

    Quote all the quotes you want - the fact is Bye-bye, sweetie. Bye-bye. That's what counts, and if you have an ounce of pride left in that swollen body of yours - say goodbye.

  23. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  24. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  25. This was a correspondence I had with one of the cast members after the firing.

    From Me: **********
    So (name withheld). Matt Mulhern. What's the story? Fired because he couldn't remember his lines??? Bull Hockey!! I know Matt Mulhern - one of the most caustic, vile irrational actors to come down the pike. Did he really get fired for not being able to memorize his lines, or (more likely) for rubbing people the wrong way to the point of wanting to punch his lights out? Spill, baby, spill!!!

    Their Reply:*****************
    You are hilarious and quite observant. Could you believe that? On the front page of the New York Times? Seriously.

    Well he was having a hard time throughout the process. He was unhappy and didn't want to be there. He didn't like cuts that were being made. He was late everyday. He was rude to the stage management staff. He refused to shave his beard. He got in several arguments with the director in front of the cast.

    And then he wrote his lines on the inside of his hat and decided to just read them. I mean just look down and read them. It was so obvious. He didn't have a big line load. Stage management offered him help and he blew them off. And then one of the other actors told him they had a problem with him reading his lines.

    So Matt walked into a production meeting and pulled the director (Michael Wilson) and demanded that the Michael chastise the other actor. And Michael said no and told Matt that he had a problem with Matt reading his lines. He asked Matt how he could help and said that the other actor shouldn't have gone directly to Matt, but that Matt's behavior was unacceptable. So Matt said, " fine then I quit," and stormed out.

    Matt then began sending crazy emails to the cast. Telling us about how evil Michael is and how terrible certain members of the cast are. He tried to get us to turn on Michael, Hallie (the writer's daughter), and the cast mate who had told him he had a problem with the "magic hat."

    It didn't work so he tried to come back to work the next day. And the theater was like, "No way. You quit. And not after all the crazy things you've been doing since you 'quit'--scaring the rest of the cast." So he claimed he never quit cause he didn't put it in writing. So the theater said fine you're fired and we will pay you for the rest of the Hartford run. But he still isn't satisfied.

    So now he is sending seriously scary emails to Michael and Hallie. He is threatening a demonstration at our opening. And violence on one of the actors. It's pretty out of hand.

    There is more, but I have to go to bed. I'll send more in the next few days. Check out his clip on Youtube. And send me some good stories. Anything that wacky going on in your cast?

  26. How about the guard the theatre posted at the stage door? How about the actors saying no way will they go on record because the person in question is probably dangereous. Equity couldn't wait to be rid of the whole mess. True nightmare. Not about lines. All about someone who is impossible to be around let alone work with. I can't even read these long strange posts. Can anybody?

    Matt likes $500. He offers it to internet hackers? Is that the story?

    Take your $500 and see someone. Seriously.

  27. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  28. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  29. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  30. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  31. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  32. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  33. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  34. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  35. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  36. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  37. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  38. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  39. Wow, Mattie.

    You clearly can remember every conversation you've had since you were fired but you couldn't be bothered to learn your lines?

    And if reading your lines stuffed in your hat isn't unprofessional conduct for an actor, what is?

  40. Wow. After reading all that, it seems that casting you as an "emotionally befuddled and distraught man" turns out to not be much of a stretch, Mattie.

  41. Good move sir. Don't feed the animals

  42. After advising my good friend Matt Mulhern to avoid the exchange he was having with the notorious anti-SAG snakes Marisa Redanty, Tom Ligon and Fred Wilhelms (Fred W), I did a little Googling on 'ol Fred, who is truly an odd fellow. As I re-print below, he is a Nashville attorney who makes a living arguing with people over royalty payments to old, or dead, recording artists. Sounds noble, right?

    Well, the confusion then sets in. Why would a lawyer, who was unceremoniously fired from the administration of an AFTRA fund for royalites - yes, you read it right - fired from AFTRTA, be so vehement in his defense of AFTRA, and so blatantly anti-SAG?

    Well, it seems Mr. Wilhelms has certain contradictions inherent in his practice, his opinions, his obsessive-compulsive blogging, and, his head.

    He has had a number of articles about his royalty-hunter exploits published in the on-line magazine, Counterpunch.

    If you go to Counterpunch, you will find some rather unsettling things for sale there, as well as a whole host of deeply unsettling articles published.

    They are all anti-semitic. As is Counterpunch itself. Don't take my word for it. Again, read below.

    Jonathan Handel may want to take note of this and think about his own willingness to publish the views of Mr. Wilhelms.

    See, Mr. Wilhelm has made a career of pursuing his lawyers share of royalties due recording artists he feels were stiffed by, yes, you got it, the jewish producers who signed them, back in the day, as it were.

    He vilifies, with thinly veiled contempt and hatred, those who he opines have stiffed these poor artists over the years.

    Again, sounds sort of noble, yes?

    But the target of his hatred are people who all happen to be, or are usually, jews.

    And he publishes, or allows the republishing of these "hunt down the jew money grubber" articles, in Counterpunch, an anti-semitic on-line magazine, according to several posts easily Googled when you type in "Counterpunch anti-semitic."

    And the insanely passionate defense of AFTRA, an organization that fired him for "mismanaging" a billion dollar royalty fund, is truly bizarre.

    See below:

    NY Times, 1994:

    "The suit has forced the fund, whose assets now exceed $1 billion, to disown the damning audits that its own officers oversaw. Those officers -- Mr. Wilhelms and Mr. Bursey -- have long since been dismissed, for what the fund describes as unsatisfactory work."

  43. "Reading Fred Wilhelms' poisonous goodbye to Ahmet Ertegun, it came to me. There is something more here than a Nashville royalties lawyer putting in the boot.

    Wilhelms has a nice story about him and Sam Moore (of Sam and Dave) and Ahmet and how he, Wilhelms, had a good laugh with Sam Moore about how Ahmet had bought his fancy shoes by ripping off Sam and how Ahmet didn't get it. I got it, though: Wilhelms is just so DOWN with those black folks. The story was lame, though, because the Erteguns were wealthy before Ahmet ever got into the music business, so he didn't have to rip off Sam Moore to get those shoes. On the other hand, you might wonder what kind of shoes Wilhelms could buy with the money he makes defending Artists Who Have Been Unjustly Denied Their Royalties. Not that, having cut himself some nice turf in the unjustly-denied-royalties biz, he would ever be anywhere but on the side of the angels. The absolute worst thing Google can find out about him is that he's got Bob Dylan on his wish list at Amazon, which I suppose most aging yuppies do. (He's also got Solomon Burke, who spoke of Ahmet with generous affection on my radio last night.)"
    Counterpunch is a web magazine owned and edited by Alexander Cockburn. Cockburn's anti-Americanism can compete only with his anti-Semitism, and Counterpunch largely promotes these two sentiments on its pages. Cockburn has been denounced in the past for both his anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism by Frank Foer of New Republic (see ) magazine, by Eric Alterman (in his MSNBC weblog), and by a variety of other journals, organizations and columnists, including the Seattle Times, the Declaration Foundation, Professor Edward Alexander,, LeftWatch, and Christian Action for Israel. In the past Cockburn openly gave credence to reports that Jews spread anthrax in the U.S. and that Israel was part of a conspiracy to topple the World Trade Center. Cockburn insists Jews conspire to control the media (see ).
    Almost every self-hating Jew on the planet capable of banging on a keyboard is today either a columnist for the anti-American web magazine Counterpunch, run by Alexander Cockburn, or is an object of Counterpunch’s celebration. Counterpunch runs Norman Finkelstein, whom even the Anti-Defamation League has declared a Holocaust denier. It regularly runs the anti-Israel lecturer Neve Gordon, a deep admirer of Finkelstein who has turned out dozens of articles attacking Israel for Cockburn, as well as Israel’s Lord Haw-Haw Uri Avnery, and dozens of other anti-Israel Jews.
    The blog Counterpunch, which is edited by Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair, has published an article which alleges that the blood libel is true and is related to purported Israeli thefts of human organs from Palestinians. The blood libel, the charge that Jews ritually murdered gentiles and used their blood to cast spells, was a mainstay of medieval European anti-Semitism. In Europe, the blood libel led to pogroms, mass slayings and expulsions. The Counterpunch article may be the first instance of an American leftist media outlet promoting the blood libel.
    In May 2006, James Taranto, editor of the Wall Street Journal's online website, referred to CounterPunch as a "moonbat site."

  44. What a hash of the truth. Linked to this page by my friend Matt two days ago, and checking it several times since, I can tell you, as a member of the Orphans Home Cycle cast, he is being slandered unjustly. The e-mail cited is either totally fabricated, or greatly rewritten by "anonymous" citing "anonymous." It is simply not true. Matt was doing outstanding work and the scene in question was actually sort of breathtaking. I was not alone in my appreciation of his talent. I watched the scene a number of times from the upper circle at Hartford Stage, and it wasn't until after Matt left I even was made aware as to why. I certainly never noticed he was using a prompt. I guess he needed one, temporarily, The rehearsal process was very different from the norm, and the condensing of nine plays of Horton's into about half their normal length required daily cuts that all the cast members were struggling to keep up with, myself included. This applied to people learning large parts as well as four or five smaller roles. Matt did speak out on a couple of occasions in rehearsal, about protecting the integrity of Horton's characters. Many of us agreed with him. And several reviewers have noted a certain "choppiness" in the end result, which I think validates Matt's observations in rehearsal. I am, of course, very proud of the show, and we may go to Broadway, but there has been no official announcement.
    Matt was never late, as I recall. In fact, I often found him early at both rehearsal and the theater. I never saw him act disrespectfully towards anyone - staff, crew, stage managers, the director, his fellow actors. Not once. He was full of humor, which kept the tension at bay. I think he may have simply caught Michael Wilson at a bad time of great stress for Michael and Michael overreacted. Matt is right about the giving of notes, one actor to another - it is not appropriate and shouldn't have been done. Plus, the dynamic in rehearsal was full steam ahead, there was little time for reflection. Michael needed to get the show audience-ready, and, at a certain point, I think he may have, understandably, lost a certain reserve to deal with the problem that cropped up with Matt. Matt's loss was not helpful to the show and angered a number of us deeply. He was, and still is, missed. I know Horton Foote thought the world of him, because Horton told me so, when I did "Dividing the Estate" a year and a half ago, both on and off Broadway. He was extremely impressed with him as an actor, having worked with him twice before Orphans Home, and he genuinely liked him as a person. Horton's absence in all this I have no doubt contributed to the lack of perspective and a calming voice. With real respect for the actors who stepped into Matt's shoes at short notice, none of them have been mentioned in any review. Matt's performances would have been undeniably noted, I have little doubt. They were too good not to merit mention. As to the "anonymous" slanderings of Matt, attacking him personally over the play, when he was writing about SAG politics, is wrong, and should not be allowed by the blog runner, Jonathan Handel. I personally am in favor of merger, but I voted for Matt in the NY SAG election, because when I asked him to explain his point of view to me, he did so, and made what I felt were many valid observations.
    This Fred W. person and his associations are not worthy of response. I think the post above lays bare that man's hateful agenda.

  45. For anyone interested in the side of the story Jonathan won't address, and the side the anti-unionist, pro-AFTRA, anti-SAG snakes, Marisa Redanty, Tom Ligon and Fred Whilhelms fight against, by siding with AFTRA's weak kneed leaders and the moderates within SAG,read:

    The Politics of Glamour, by David Prindle, available at Amazon

    "When does a labor union cease to become the solution to individual worker struggles and start becoming the problem? Dr. David Prindle sets before the reader a titillating example of just such a case in his definitive; The Politics of Glamour, Democracy and Ideology in the Screen Actors Guild.

    Tracking the sound reasons for forming SAG in the late 1920's, Prindle details the many early injustices visited on workers in front of the camera in uniquely American industry, the movie business. Adroitly, Prindle illustrates how SAG was born as a Guild and bred into a Union. This is a comprehensive history of the titanic forces at play shaping the most widely known yet little understood labor union in the United States. Dr. Prindle explains in careful detail the evolution of SAG from founders like Eddie Cantor and Jimmy Cagney through recent Guild Presidents Ronald Reagan, Charlton Heston and Ed Asner.

    If you want to know how the Screen Actors Guild evolved from a scrappy, tough-fisted bunch of actors bent on decent jobs, wages and working conditions to a wimpy, politically correct pack of star-wanna-bees, then you will enjoy this book.

    Prindles style has snap, crackle and pop because he doesn't take sides in the many ideological wars that ravage SAG politics even to this day. He lets the towering Hollywood legends call it as they see it. Then he documents the antics of their retinues, deployed in battalion strength to muscle political control over one of Americas most influential labor organizations."

  46. Matt, by removing your posts that have your name and then obviously RESUBMITTING a bunch pro Matt propoganda do you think anybody is fooled? You send fake emails, comments from yourself praising yourself with different names etc. constantly. It's your MO. It's pathetic. Nobody is fooled.
    Like we don't know it's you who wrote this dreck!! Boy you are really over the top.

  47. I've angered some wingnuts in my time. Mulhern is one of them.

    Mattie appears to believe that piling up patently ludicrous allegations about me will somehow make him appear saner. It hasn't worked before. All of the nonsense he posted here "anonymously" has already been refuted, but then reality has never been much of an obstacle to Mattie when he's got a head of steam going (and he's clearly never had a head of anything else). The last time he produced the Counterpunch stuff (which is cut and paste here as it was then), he even pretended to be Jewish in order to get people to chase me from a website. It didn't work, just as it didn't work when he pretended to be black, or when he pretended to be a woman, or when he pretended to be a black woman. It turns it he was no better in those roles than he apparently was in the one he got fired from for not learning his lines.

    You know, Mattie, even down here in Nashville, actors know that learning lines is part of the job. If you promise to try hard, I can put in a good word at the local dinner theater for you. You might have to bus tables until you prove you can memorize the specials, but it's a start.

  48. Fred, why should the patrons of the dinner theatre be punished? They just want a good meal and a show? What did they ever do to you?

    Mattie carefully created his own hell. His life seems to be stuffed with suffering, anger and bitterness. It's probably best to let that bitterness eat away at him naturally without our poking. Why should we get involved? It's nature.

    Matt made his own mattress of "bed bugs." They'll feed or not. After all he created them. But for the grace of God go I. Matt, we're so sorry about your self loathing. It must be a living hell to be you.

  49. How strange that these people seem to think everyone who takes a pro-SAG position is Matt Mulhern.

    There are many of us.

  50. But only one Matt Mulhern.

    The City Is Surrounded.

    The Door Is On Fire.