Wednesday, February 3, 2016

CSBA: Seriously?

So I happened across this tweet/retweet last night.  So @joan_lacoca posts this graphic of Candy in the passenger seat of a Mercedes SUV and Jesus at the wheel with the caption of Candy saying: “Jesus Take the Wheel” and Jesus saying: “I Can’t Drive” and then Candice retweets it.  Seriously? You can’t make this sort of thing up.  So does anyone else find this in bad taste?  Given Candy’s history with Mercedes SUV’s, is it appropriate to retweet this?  For us the Jury is still out on if Joan is a real person or just another Candice Sock Puppet.

If Joan is a real person, then was she totally mocking Candy-Cane with this post? The conversation between Candy and Joan that follows is a bit disjointed so we are leaning sock puppet. If it is a sock puppet account, then WTF is going thru Candy’s head that she thinks this a great graphic to put out into the world!

Related: Small Business Employees Texting

Update: So at some point this AM, Joan fearing for the wrath of Candice over this post completely turned her account off while she tried to figure out what to do.  Eventually, she did figure out how to delete the tweet so the graphic no longer shows up—I am certain tho, it is only a matter of time before a screen capture of it shows up and when it does we will be linking to it.   Also, from the clunky manner and lack of double down on Joan’s part, we are leaning towards Real Person, not sock puppet and at the time she did the graphic, she was def. mocking Candy—more on that later… 

 Update 2: That didn’t take long… ;-) 

 Update 3:  So Candy’s new Pawn & Puppet, Joan, has really lost it over this post.  She is trying to do anything and everything she can to try to get this screen cap of her original tweet that Candy-Cane retweeted and praised, I might add, removed.  In total Candy fashion she pulls out that she is the victim, she complains about her account that was suspended over copyright infringement, that she pulled down the graphic because we were infringing upon her copyright, etc. 

 Once again, we feel we are 100% within Fair Use.  It is both relevant news and worthy of debate.  A Reminder to all, when this original tweet was published and retweeted, Candy was not even a year into community supervision for her DWI guilty plea in the Intoxicated Assault with a Vehicle case and the related civil court case was still pending over what happened when she was at the wheel of a similar model of Mercedes SUV.  

 Joan and Candice may not have seen a correlation when they were coo-coo’ing each other over how flattering it was for Joan to make such an inspirational graphic of Candice, but the insensitivity and inappropriateness of the graphic is staggering and very apparent to the rest of the world.  When we pointed that out, instead of admitting to such and apologizing they both doubled down and it was everyone else, not them, who had a lapse in judgement.

 Here are a few of the tweets from yesterday and this am:










Update 4:
Ironically, of all the posts and editorials on CSBA, this one has had resonated the most.  I am really surprised the amount of hand-wringing that has come about over this graphic, tho the most vocal was of course, Candy’s seemingly: BFF, Surrogate, Soulmate, Puppet, Press Secretary & Graphic Designer; Joan.  

 So first things first, in our first update, we stated that we were Leaning towards: (1) Joan being a real person and (2) that it appeared to us that Joan was mocking Candy when she posted the graphic.  

 As a Matter of disclosure, Joan has sent us many messages, and we have touched on those in other posts.  She has asked not to be quoted, so we will not quote her directly at this time, however, when appropriate we will reference overall sentiments and summarize what has been expressed to us by Joan and identify it accordingly.    

 So, do we think that Joan is a real person or a sock puppet?  We feel 99.99% sure that Joan is a real person with a real last name, sock puppets of her own and everything, tho, we will say we absolutely know and knew that LaLoca was not a real last name, curiously it does sound like a Drag Performer Stage Name, we are picturing a Hot Blooded Latina, thick overdone makeup with a bowl of fruit on her head kind of act.  However, since she didn’t give us her real last name when she intro’d herself to our primary curator, we didn’t give her any of ours.  

 As to the question of if Joan was mocking Candy with this graphic in the first place: it is really hard to say how we feel on that subject, we still feel that on some level that there could have been Mocking.  We have been told in several messages from Joan that this was just an incredible coincidence, that there was no intention of mocking and it was simply Joan putting a graphic together that represented one of Candy’s blog posts (that has since been taken down).  Further, Joan has communicated that she felt it was completely wrong on our part for pointing out the graphic at all.  So we can take Joan at her word?

 At the end of the day, when we look at the time line, previous posts/tweets from and related to Joan + Candy, Joan & Candy’s CooCoo’ing each other with love-praise-affection, it would be hard to make a case that it was consciously Joan mocking her, after all  we see so much “worship” of Candy by Joan in her old tweets, but it is equally hard to make the case that Joan was void of any knowledge of any of Candy’s history, considering how “all in” she became with Candy Land life, issues and feuds in such a short period of time, so I think it is just as far fetched that it was an “absolute” coincidence.  For Us the issue was and has always boiled down to  judgement on Candy’s part.  At no time has Joan or anyone else given us reason to think or believe that Candy retweeting Joan’s graphic should receive a free pass on the insensitivity/inappropriate/bad taste scale.  If anything, what has been expressed to us in private has only strengthened our belief that not only was this retweet incredibly insensitive but we also wonder if Candice knew what the second interpretation could be before she retweeted it and she was ok with it that day and every day after because it could serve a specific purpose for Candice, after all:  Candy didn’t post it, how would Joan know about the accident, It was all just a big coincidence, Joan was just trying to be Funny Ha-Ha, Candy didn’t think about the other interpretation, i.e. Yet Specific People could be hurt or offended but Candy hands remain clean—and it could be deleted at anytime—until of course it got pointed out as being insensitive and people took notice.  Go Figure…  


 Fun Fact: before Joan’s twitter account @No_Elder_Abuse was suspended, it contained over 700 tweets to or retweets of @RenegadeAtty alone.  Thats 20%+ of the visible tweets.

Update 5:

Despite all the worship, it appears that there could be trouble in Coo-Coo-Ing land.



It certainly is not, nor is truth and justice…

@No_Elder_Abuse_ is(was?) of course Candy’s BFF, Soul Mate, Press Secretary, Cheerleader, Ego Fluffer, Spokesperson, puppet, muscle and general right hand, Joan (@Joan_LaLoca, @Synthespia1, & @Jan_of_Arc_).  I would be dishonest if I said we have lots of questions about this tweet, but having followed the exploits of Candy for many years, you learn that there is a certain pattern to her life and this is simply the same [runaway] train ride, just different day and different puppets.

It has certainly been apparent in our various communications with Joan that she was conflicted between her unconditional support/worship of Candice and the cracks in Candice’s side of the story(s) as well as gaps in the person Candy portrays herself to be vs. who she shows herself to be thru her words and actions.  




Well Said Joan, Well Said!  It will be interesting to see if this is a permanent change in the Candy & Joan Show or if this is simply another bump in their Liz Taylor/Richard Burton-esqu Womance.  

  
Posted by at
Labels: , , , , , ,

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)