February 03, 2014
Mia Farrow's family is full of invalids and ingrates
Woody Allen needs to have a talk with his Jewish lawyer about several lawsuits it might be necessary for him to file against Mia Farrow and her nutty children.
Well, aside from the one he took nudie photos of and then married, and the ones who probably can't speak anyway, because they're retarded and hence probably don't have anything to sue for anyway. They're like Rocky at the end of Rocky V, after he had to put a shoe on the late, great Tommy Morrison, and then he coldcocked the surrogate Don King. Spoiler alert from 1990, or whenever TF that was.
First of all, I shudder to think how much money Woody Allen has spent over the years supporting Mia Farrow and her umpteen disabled children (I'd say they're all disabled in some form or another), supplementing the ridonkulous checks she must receive from the government each month. Whatever she gets, I bet it dwarfs the amount received by the infamous Cadillac-driving Chicago welfare queen unearthed by Ronald Reagan when he was running for the Republican nomination back in '76. No one in that family should ever have anything bad to say about Woody Allen.
If an old white man was cutting me checks for millions of dollars, putting me through all kinds of fancy private schools, I'm not saying he would be allowed to touch my balls -- I would of course kill him and claim self-defense. I'm just saying. That would be the only old white man in Murica I didn't have anything bad to say about. I'd start an entire web site specifically for the purpose of singing that cracka-ass cracka's praises. I should be so lucky. I couldn't even get an old white man to pay me to do actual work. How do you think I would up on the Internets?
The last thing I'd be doing is going on white people daytime Twitter to accuse my benefactor of crimes he couldn't possibly have committed. It just goes to show how ungrateful, and how detached from reality, Mia Farrow and her children are. A good 13 or so of them at least have an excuse, but there is no excuse for the behavior of Mia, adopted daughter Dylan a/k/a Malone(?!), and alleged biological son "Ronan."
There needs to be a reckoning, and it should have started back when it was announced in Vanity Fair that "Ronan" is really Frank Sinatra's son (as if it wasn't already obvious). Woody, who's a genius, probably already had his suspicions, but if she's admitting to it in Vanity Fair, then she needs to go ahead and fork over a check for whatever Woody was forced to spend on that kid over the years. Because Frank Sinatra is the real father, it's not like this is a matter of the real father being some freshout who's either dead or impossible to track down and probably broke anyway. It might be necessary for Frank's estate to cut a check.
Really, a man shouldn't be compelled to cut a check to a child who doesn't even carry his name. It's just not right. You want to give yourself a fake name based on some long lost Robert De Niro movie from 1998? Fine, buy your own damn lunch.
Woody was probably cutting checks to Dylan a/k/a Malone too, since his adoption of both her and her older brother Moses went through after the investigation into his alleged molestation of the former. Technically, Malone and Moses are still Woody Allen's children, and so is "Ronan," at least until paternity is determined on a very special episode of the Maury show. Why would a family court allow Woody Allen to adopt Dylan a/k/a Malone, if it's true what she said, that Woody diddled her? Because it's not true what she said, duh!
That's why the results of the '92 investigation said as much, and that's why Woody has been able to adopt two more kids -- one of them white! -- in two different states, after further prying into his affairs by family courts. This is all broken down in a thorough, damning defense of Woody that ran in the Daily Beast last week, written by the guy who directed the great PBS documentary on Woody a few years ago. Dylan a/k/a Malone, "Ronan" and especially trifling-ass Mia Farrow, were all effectively ethered. There's no way you could read it and still think that (a) Woody Allen really diddled that girl; or (b) any of these people are at all sane.
If you still think Woody Allen makes sweet, passionate love to children, your argument is not with me, it's with the following, in this order: (1) Facts; (2) Logic; (3) The Daily Beast; (4) Whoever "tampered with" you when you were a child. Don't come into the comments section with that BS, because I don't want to hear it. Pretend the comments section is Sharkeisha's sister Lakeshia's front yard.
Though it doesn't say it anywhere in the letter or in the introduction by New York Times columnist Nick Kristof, on whose blog it ran, the open letter that Dylan a/k/a Malone supposedly penned was in response to the article in the Daily Beast (which itself was in response to attacks made on Twitter by Mia Farrow and "Ronan" during the Golden Globes the other day). She was pissed, because now everyone -- i.e. the few people who read that article, who probably already knew anyway -- knew she was full of shit.
The fact that Nick Kristof, the guy who's as responsible as anyone for the trend of referring to sex work as "human trafficking," who also ran a years-long harassment campaign against the Village Voice, contributing to that paper's sad downfall, didn't see fit to indicate that this letter had anything to do with the article in the Daily Beast just proves, once again, that you can't believe anything you read in the New York Times.
After the letter went viral on Twitter this past weekend, some people were under the impression that the article in the Daily Beast was in response to the letter, rather than vice versa, as if the guy typed up that entire thing and had someone spellcheck and put together artwork in the 15 minutes or so since the letter had gone live on the Times website. It just goes to show the level of intellect we're up against.
See also: articles suggesting Woody could get locked up behind this, when the statute of limitations is 15 years, let alone the fact that he's already been vindicated; people still referring to Soon-Yi as Woody's stepdaughter (I see you "Yasiin Bey"); articles claiming the letter goes into explicit detail about what Woody supposedly did to Dylan a/k/a Malone, which it doesn't; so on and so forth.
 There was a thing on her in Slate a while back. It's one of the most fascinating, disgusting things you'll ever read. Look it up.
 Is Dylan calling herself Malone as part of some bizarre tribute to Moses Malone? That alone should invalidate anything she says.
 Mia Farrow has umpteen kids, got pregnant by two married men and lives to throw salt on her baby daddy's accomplishments. She's a white hoodrat.
Posted by Bol at 01:13 PM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Mia Farrow's family is full of invalids and ingrates: