-------
VEN (LAS VEGAS) — Anti-American, pro-illegal-alien Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has denied reports that she was a member of the maniacal Manson Family hippie death cult responsible for the gruesome Tate-LaBianca murders in August, 1969, or that she was head-over-heels in love with cult leader Charles Manson, as reported by TMZ Wednesday.
"In 1967, I was what the kids referred to then as a flower child and yes, for a brief period of time after running away from home, I found myself in the company of what turned out to be some very disreputable people.
"But thankfully, in I think it was June of 1969, before anything really bad happened, I was, you know, rescued by my father's friend Anton LaVey and never . . . I never . . . looked . . . you know . . . back!
"I never looked back.
"I mean honestly, who . . . who . . . would?
"So no I was never actually a member of the Manson Family, nor as I recall was I never involved ah . . . romantically you know with Charl . . . with Mr . . . with Manson, although I certainly . . . knew (everyone did!) you know, who Charlie WAS!
"But no, I wasn't. I was never. It was more like . . . like I . . . like I was . . . the . . . a friend of this . . . promiscuous cousin Squeaky . . . who at that time with Charlie, Squeaky and I you know, like like all teenage girls at that time, liked to, to, to cease to exist and have have . . . a certain amount of . . . of fun and oh my goodness! looking back now, you know we smoked . . . oh, by today's standards . . . a LOT of . . . of grass and pretty, pretty girl at that time dropping acid all day and dancing just, you know, just never learn not to love you — OK? — and sing and drink Jimsonweed tea and give up our world and just . . . just . . . come and say you love me . . . !
"Come and say you love me!
A young Nancy Pelosi at the Spahn Ranch, May 1969
"So as far as I'm concerned that chapter, the Manson chapter of my, my life is is closed. And we won't be . . . talking about that anymore!"
Developing . . . .
55 comments:
Sorry Matt. I just don't get it at all. Political pandering on this forum ???
Most of the things I've seen great comedy in or found really funny were actually never intended that way.
Robert, I'd call it Manson-related satirical amusement with pause for consequences.
I don't either.
???
C'mon people, you've never read The Onion? This is pretty funny stuff.
Hey non sequitur here... Im just finishing up Taming the Beast. You guys have any thoughts on that one?
Coupler of good points from it were that charlie read a lot of books and he was 5'3"
430 year old Shironda P
Hilarious but I hope mt extra conservative brother doesn't see it. He hates her with only a passion a former San Francisco resident can. He is so misinformed by Fox News that he would believe every word. And yes, believe it or not, there are conservatives in San Francisco.
I wonder whether "getting it" and "not getting it" falls along party lines?
True story: the night stalker killed Peter pan in san francisco
Dan S said...
Im just finishing up Taming the Beast. You guys have any thoughts on that one?
Yeah, it's quite an interesting book but rather than Manson coming across as the disturbed one throughout its pages, it's the author. He's not the greatest advert for joining the prison and rehabilitation services !
I thought what he said about Charlie being punked by the AB guy on death row was interesting. I thought Ed George's observation about Clara Livesey and the day she came to interview Charlie, was also interesting, particularly given the contents of her book.
The pin cushion also came across as a very interesting character. The amount of times he was stabbed but survived illustrates that even in a case of multiple stab wounds, death is not not necessarily a given.
Gorodish said...
C'mon people, you've never read The Onion? This is pretty funny stuff
Naw, never read it. I didn't find it funny. It felt like someone was trying too hard to be funny. I'm a hard taskmaster when it comes to comedy, whereas real life unintentional things often has me creasing up.
orwhut said...
I wonder whether "getting it" and "not getting it" falls along party lines?
You know, as an Englishman that has long been something that fascinated me about the protests over the Vietnam war in the 60s. Both main USA parties were in government presiding over the war and the protests were fierce regardless. I wonder to what extent humour with a particular slant crosses party lines, even though it may not be seen as appropriate to laugh at something aimed at your own. I suspect parties are rife with internal wranglings and internicene warfare and lots of party people just dig what they see as good humour, regardless of where the barbs fall.
orwhut said...
I wonder whether "getting it" and "not getting it" falls along party lines?
Good one...
I "read somewhere" Bobby B and Charlie had an Owsley-fueled 3-way with Donald Trump.
No .... honest!
Grim, I've always been interested in Pin Cushions back story, of course it is most likely violent and not at all charming.
Orwhut said: " I wonder whether "getting it" and "not getting it" falls along party lines? "
No - way off base. I "got it" from the standpoint of understanding but just wondered about the purpose of it being on this blog. And a hearty guffaw to some, sophomoric to others, each their own. If people here believe it belongs then … there it is …
There are no party lines. We live under the bipartisan consensus owned by wall street. Grimbo, thanks for your assessment. Very good points about the author being the one cracking up. Good perspective on the Manson Women book's genesis. Was the beat down to Charlie by Como? Also interesting to see Charlie's self destructive behavior esp towards guitars and electronic equipment that should bring him respite and his only pleasures.
Charlie working in the chapel and himself being the attraction instead of god was pretty funny and also his escape stash of like a half pound of weed.
I'm checking out the Manson Myth on scribd right now. Seems pretty legit and also Helter Skelter is not the motive
https://www.scribd.com/doc/117313529/Charles-Manson-Myth
Who takes credit for writing that?
It's pretty well written but he uses some big words that dont mean what he thinks they mean. They're close to the right word and it's hilarious. Also puts watson when he mean watkins sometimes
Matt said...
Who takes credit for writing that?
It's actually out in its final form as a book called "False Profit: Garbage dump to guru." The online version, "The Manson Myth" isn't the final version. It was put together by 5 or 6 different people but the author 'name' is "Ghostdancer" and is "published" by Fast Pencil publishing of Carson City. On the inside, it states that there is "no copyright."
Dan S said...
Was the beat down to Charlie by Como?
I don't know. Although I've heard talk of the Como smackdown {I can't recall where or from whom}, the Death Row 'punking' episodes George describes was definitely a guy from the AB but he doesn't say who. He makes the guy sound like an animal though and if true, one almost feels sorry for Charlie in being forced to be the guy's 'woman.' It's also almost funny the way he writes that the decision to do away with the death penalty "rescued Manson from the dual horrors of sexual depravity and death."
But then, I find certain phrasing funny when it's clearly not intended.
Also interesting to see Charlie's self destructive behavior esp towards guitars and electronic equipment that should bring him respite and his only pleasures
Particularly when one considers in "Crucified: The Railroading of Charles Manson" how many times he complains that he wasn't allowed it. Also funny in "Crucified" is his continual asking for the book "Helter Skelter." And in "Taming the beast" he actually hands Ed George a copy saying "It tells about me" which I thought was hilarious. More hilarious than the Nancy spoof !
George did say one thing that would have been a bit of an eye opener had I not already suspected it; that Manson had left jail in '67 with good intentions but found that after acid, he could use it to turn people on and they'd listen to him and follow him and that he himself was surprised that people would do this but that he could actually control them as a result. I've long thought that he didn't specifically set out to kill, but that events just continued as an unthought out improvisation ~ until they started becoming thought out.
I'm checking out the Manson Myth on scribd right now. Seems pretty legit and also Helter Skelter is not the motive
Well, Bugliosi never said it was the motive.
Personally, I don't think it's a good book. But it does, in one tome, outline most of the alternative theories that have been standard fare on the blogs since the early part of the 21st century, with the requisite badmouthing of Linda, Tex, Bugliosi, Snake, Watkins etc. At one point, our old sparring partner, Manson Mythos/Phoenix Rising/Dennis LaCalandra/Manson Family Archives, used to say so much that literally came from the book that I asked him if he was one of the contributors but he said he wasn't.
Anyone able to email me the PDF file if this? For some reason I can't access via my Google account.
Also sucks that the Oxygen vids are "not available for viewing in my country (Canada)"
FFS!
If someone thinks they can email the PDF file, lemme know. I can shoot my personal email address to you in some manner that is compatible for both of us (Messenger, Facebook, via one of the Admins here, etc...)
Not the end of the world if nobody can...my interest has been piqued by the guffaws pointed out by you folks
Cheers
Doug
Dennis LaCalandra - any affiliation with that "Helter Skelter Alternate Theories" group on FB? What a bunch of egomaniacs at the heart of that group! I lurk on there and, regularly laugh and/or throw up a wee bit in my mouth at 85% (min) of their posts/post comments.
They sure have a deep hatred for this blog also.
You folks must've sparred the bejeezus outta him
lol
Doug said...
Dennis LaCalandra - any affiliation with that "Helter Skelter Alternate Theories" group on FB?......They sure have a deep hatred for this blog also.
You folks must've sparred the bejeezus outta him
It would be one heck of a coincidence if there were two Dennis LaCalandras that were advocates of HS alternates although in saying that, two Michael Jacksons were heavily involved in "Blame it on the boogie" {one wrote it, one was part of the group that made it a hit}, two George Harrisons were involved in the Liverpool music scene of the early 60s {one was a journalist, one was a Beatle}, there were two Rolling Stones and two Nirvanas that made albums and two Republican George W. Bush presidents within 16 years etc so you never know.
I doubt it though.
I always liked Dennis' contribution. He himself had some contentious views on women and race but he was prepared to take a smacking as well as give one. I enjoyed our sparring battles. It was partly through our jousts that I learned the importance of being informed and not just having opinions. The latter part of 2015 and 2016 and a bit of 2017 saw the best of him in his various guises here when he wasn't getting some of his flameworthy comments removed !
Now is the time for helter skelter could just mean it's getting hectic and out of control. The jock was the bad influence at band camp. The timing of TLB is 2 days after BB's arrest.
Also i wish i could find the big words usted badly in the Manson Myth. There we're 3 or 4 instances but i didn't take note of the first couple . the last one was "satyr" instead of "satire" but the earlier ones we're more funny like "incontinent" instead of "incompetent".
I'm going down to LA to play the rainbow bar and grill with my band Hell on Wheels. I think it's Monday. We're Gonna save the money and not play a shitty slot at the Whisky. There's another show in the LA area on Saturday. Don't wanna make my comment fail so I'll look it up in a minute and post it
Malones bar and grill in santa ana saturday
10/26/19
https://www.reverbnation.com/hellonwheels/shows
Oh and i don't think you'd name your club after the big race war you're expecting either
In the mid 1990's I had an opportunity to purchase a set of the trial transcripts from James Mason. I said no after finding out that Manson had sent them to Mason after Stephen Kay got tired of Manson saying he never had an opportunity to read the transcripts, so Kay being the good guy he is loaned them to Manson. Mason was in prison at the time for statutory rape and needed cash. Kay knew some Nazi in Ohio had his transcripts and was not happy about it. I didn't want Kay pissed at me so I opted out. As far as I know Mason still has them.
Dan S said...
Oh and i don't think you'd name your club after the big race war you're expecting either
On the other hand, doing so just might be evidence of how much it was part of your psyche at the time. Rather like how Country Sue and her mate who weren't even members of the Family at the time of the murders, painting the cupboard door with "Helter Skelter" while the Family had traipsed up to Barker, show just how pervasive HS was in the Family's thought and action. That two relative newcomers should think of decorating a cupboard door in Juan Flynn's trailer with those words is more revealing than seagulls swooping on unsuspecting passers by and grabbing their lunch is of their daring and hunger.
Now is the time for helter skelter could just mean it's getting hectic and out of control
I agree.
But the events over the next 36 hours will forever taint that notion, even if it were actually true.
The timing of TLB is 2 days after BB's arrest
There are a number of reasons why the copycat is bollocks but the chief one for me is Leslie Van Houten speaking to Marvin Part in December 1969. She had absolutely nothing to lose by telling him it was a copycat set of killings. She was charged with murder. She admits to both murder and conspiracy to murder. She lands Bobby, Susan and Mary in the shit, saying they murdered Gary. She lands Pat, her best friend and mentor, in the shit, saying she murdered at Cielo. She lands Charlie, whom she admits is Jesus, in the shit of murder and conspiracy. She lands Tex and Clem in the shit of the same. She shows Linda ran off the first night and was under Charlie's total direction the 2nd night. She shows that she herself chickened out of murder until Tex fortified her, then she got the bit between her teeth and went for it gung ho. She lays out the whole concept of pigs, Beatle lyrics, bottomless pits, Black people, killing and the Family's place in matters and then if that wasn't enough, she says she'd do the whole thing over again if faced with the same. So, although this is a private conversation between her and her lawyer that was never meant for public hearing and could never be used against her in a trial {after all, she pled 'not guilty'}, at virtually every single turn, she incriminates herself, incriminates her friends, incriminates the man she believes is Jesus Christ and not once says a single word about killings designed to free Bobby, the same Bobby that she loved, the same Bobby that was the reason she was really at Spahn in the first place, the same Bobby whose 'girl' she was seen as. She and the others would have been in exactly the same position if she had said "we did this so the police could see that Bobby wasn't involved in Gary's death." But no ! What does she do ? She incriminates Bobby in Gary's murder !
The copycat is a crock.
That's a good argument. I thought of why LVH would propose HS and my thinking was she would want to not incriminate bobby but that blows that theory out of the water
I'm reading David Mcowan's Programmed to Kill. It makes me think that the girls were in a dissociative state and easily manipulated. Basically brain washed.
The girls would have weeded themselves out (or in) by deciding to stay under the sexist Charlie and his heavy handed ways. He Would Only abuse the girls who misbehaved and they all would be debased from the get go ("in the dirt"). So any one who fit in might quite enjoy giving up their own will.
What's wrong with the HS motive is the idea of premeditation. I think the whole thing was more of an improvisation. The race war idea Would trickle down from prison and flood down from the Fountain of the World so they'd be talking about that.
Charlie's favorite saying those days was the title of thr heaviest new song ever, Helter Skelter. It's the new word in his speech patterns and he's saying it a lot. "A race war? Man, that would be Helter Skelter.
"Oh, man Bobby's in jail for murder, that i conspired to? Oh, hell no! Now is the time for helter skelter."
So girls in a dissociative state attached to dissociatve in training but with a screw loose Charlie Crazy Watson. I don't think Charles Manson is in control of this situation.
In many ways Manson's responsible for the situation but his direct responsibility could be reduced greatly. Charles Watson bears much more scrutiny... What's with this guy? Did he murder before? I haven't gotten to the Manson part in the Mcgowan book yet.
What about the SRA that kills children in this country? It reads like a bad pulp novel. If this stuff is true like Larry King Nebraska Boystown Franklin Cover up I really weep for the world.
Dan S said...
That's a good argument
And that's only a fraction of it.
I thought of why LVH would propose HS
The standard objection is that her lawyer was trying to get her to parrot Susan Atkins' story to the GJ and go on like she believed it wholeheartedly so that she could be gotten off on an insanity jag. But that overlooks the fact that [a] the lawyer really did think she was mad, [b] that they had obviously spoken at length because in that taped interview, he mentions things they've talked about before {and is ∴ able to frame his questions to elicit the right responses} and [c] she refused to speak to any psychiatrists, pitched in her lot on a joint trial with Charlie and very soon after sacked Marvin Part.
There are no logical or illogical reasons why she told Part what she told him other than the fact that she believed it and it was true.
What's wrong with the HS motive is the idea of premeditation. I think the whole thing was more of an improvisation
I agree with you that it was an improvisation. But improvising doesn't rule out premeditation. To put it simply, as far back as the June of '69, he was telling Paul Watkins, Dianne Lake and Juan Flynn that he/they was/were going to have to show Blackie how to kick this thing off. So it was in his mind before August. It may not even have been in his mind as a definite 'we are going to do this now as he arrived back at Spahn from San Diego that day in August. But it shouldn't be dismissed that the day before, in San Diego, he was telling Stephanie Schram's sister about the blood that was going to be spilled and how the Beatles had laid it out. And deciding that evening that it was to start would be the improvisational aspect of the matter. Sending Susan, Pat & Linda without them knowing what was to happen adds to the unfolding improvisational thought of Charlie, the out of the ordinary con who didn't even do crime like a straightforward criminal. Manson existed in paradox and TLB is a shining example of it. Far from premeditation and improvisation being contradictory in this instance, their very presence together sums up Manson, the Family and to a lesser extent, much of the countercultural changes that existed from '65 through to th early 70s.
He Would Only abuse the girls who misbehaved and they all would be debased from the get go
Sometimes, if someone is up for a particular action, it's highly debatable whether it is actually abuse. Obviously, it depends on the person and the ages but many of the women, young as some of them were, that got down and dirty with Charlie didn't think of it as them being debased.
Dan S said...
Charles Watson bears much more scrutiny...
Oh, he gets that. He's gotten it ad nauseum in his parole hearings. And 50 years after entering a cell on suspicion of murder, he's never once walked the streets.
He's gotten it ad nauseum on the blogs for 2 deacdes. And the simple reality is that......there's very little there. Speculation, hatred, accusation.
He's gotten it ad nauseum from helter sceptic authors since the 1980s. Emmons, White, Nelson, Shreck, Stimson, Hendrickson, Ghostdancer, Livsey.
We hear so much about all these drug heists he supposedly pulled. Yet not one detail that you could hang your hat on, much less pin your life on. We hear about all of these drug cons he pulled. Yet the only one that anyone can talk about is Lotsapoppa. We hear about his romance {ha ha ha} with Linda. Yet she denied it, he denied it and no one else substantiates it outside of trying to absolve Charlie from HS. Significantly, Charlie never pointed to it. We hear about him and Frykowski or him and Sebring but not a single soul has ever come forward with even a smidgen of a link. We hear about him and Suzan LaBerge but the best anyone can do in providing evidence is to say that they lived near each other.
Lots of people have spoken about Charles Watson and he's been scrutinized to Venezuela and back and quite frankly, the best we can do is......what we already know. He committed a series of brutal murders. I don't believe there's a lot to him. He's pretty dull {he certainly was back at the time of his notoriety}, he didn't have much of interest, let alone groundbreaking, to say, unlike Charlie or some of his loyal cohorts. If someone is some kind of criminal mastermind, even if they keep getting caught, even if their partners only think they are, somewhere along the line, there'll be at least a couple of people that will attest to that, in attitude or words. Manson got that in spades. Watson didn't even get that in teaspoons. No one from his college days, school days or working days or even the Family, came out and told of what a go ahead, out of the box, inspiring leader Tex was. No one ! Other than the Crowe incident, no one even came out and spoke of how deceitful or devious he was. He made virtually zero dent on the crime statistics prior to August 8th '69. My older sister used to describe someone like him as having milk in his veins. I'd go one further and say diluted milk. When Tex is scrutinized prior to the murders, he's not vastly different to many young guys of his ilk at the time that were grappling with the challenges and changes of the new and evolving counterculture and trying to work out how to put one foot before the other, except that he ended so many peoples lives.
Well that's the point. They self selected themselves by liking that short of treatment.
He must've been a lousy drug dealer/ scammer to have to sleep in that shack
Too much ofa coincidence that the Fountain had the same prophecy. I think the race war idea came from there and heightened by the happenstance that Lotsapoppa was black. Is it established he wasn't a panther? "Manson Myth" tries to proved he was. I thought it was established he wasn't.
I still think the over kill on the typewriters stabby stole is significant in understanding his competitive drive in impressing his cohorts
Dan S said...
Too much of a coincidence that the Fountain had the same prophecy
There were lots of people that thought there would be a war of some kind between Black and White people in the USA over a very long period. I dare say there were people that genuinely thought it would happen soon after the abolition of slavery. Gregg Jacobson said that Manson was talking about it when he met him in '68. It was known as "the shit is coming down." That there was a certain paranoia about a race war is notin the slightest bit unusual. What put Charlie and his ilk on a completely different footing was actively trying to get it going. But he was an amalgam of other peoples' ideas, but filtered through his own inimitable thought process.
Lotsapoppa......wasn't a panther? "Manson Myth" tries to prove he was
Among other things, that should tell you much of what you need to know about that tome. It's a general trend among helter sceptic authors to shoehorn anything into a theory that has as its net outcome "HS is not the motive." But as I said earlier, it was never presented as the sole motive, rather, it was presented as one of 5 motives.
Grim, several times I have heard that Leslie Van Houten was involved with a cult before Spahn, that was centered in the Santa Cruz Mountains. I grew up in that area so it has always stuck in head. Santa Cruz is 75-80 miles south of San Francisco and just under 350 miles north of Los Angeles. Have you heard this rumor and what do you make of it?
No, I've never heard it and given the extent to which she's had to rake over the coals of her life and hasn't mentioned it, I'd have to say I don't believe it. It's true that some could point out that it would be in her interests to keep quiet about it as someone like the Guv'nor could use it as evidence that she's prone to cults and the like, but then, we know about the Self Realization Fellowship that she was part of, her running away from home to go to the Haight to be among the Hippies and of course the Family, so that cancels that out. She was 18, just about to turn 19, when she came to Spahn. Even for those runaway times, that's young. Was there even time for her to have been involved with a cult between the acid, the Bobby Mackie romance, the SRF, the pregnancy, Haight~Ashbury, the secretarial course etc ?
The only Santa Cruz Mountains cult I've ever heard of is William Riker's Holy City, which was pretty much gone by 1959. That would definitely preclude Leslie's being involved with them. It's probably an exaggeration/embellishment stemming from one of the 3,419 cults mentioned in the Ed Sanders book.
I do know there were cults in that area at that time. I remember hearing about all the strange things going on there as a child. Santa Cruz in the early 1970’s a very small beach community had two serial killers Edmund Kemper and Herb Mullen and a mass murderer John Frazier all killing at the same time. Santa Cruz was very rural and the mountain area was wilderness plus. Ed Sanders puts a Process splinter group there during Manson’s family days with the portable creametory. If she was a member it would have lasted less than three months because like you said she was so young. Now that it looks like Van Houten isn’t getting out maybe she would tell me the truth. I have written her before and she responded so maybe she would again. I warned both her and Krenwinkel about Bill Nelson and how all he wanted to do bring bad attention to them so maybe she remembers me.
Santa Cruz was a serial killer hotspot from around 68-72 though...something "in the air" there perhaps.
Unrelated to your query though
Sorry about my comment ^^^^
I hadn't read this far down yet ;-)
You should write her.
xrelex says-
There once was this little Pelosi girl
who longed to find a Tilt-A-Whirl
But it never came to her town
so with conspiracies abound
she searched and has found
This portal in time
disguised as a ride
forever on and down
the helter-skelter slide
It's pretty good but i think you can edit it just a bit to make it a more punchy limerick
I wonder if the Family liked Halloween, costumes and candy and playing other roles. And yes I know they didn't believe in schedules but someone at the Spahn Ranch had to tell them.
Every day was Halloween: zuzus and magic mystery tours
Dan S,
Thx for the props. I have spent the only 5 mins on that woman I have the stomach for.
Wasn't trying to follow a limerick structure tho. The only edit I made concerning structure was to get to-
2
3
4
Cheers.
Post a Comment