HOW TO TEACH IT: What Carlson said on Monday night!

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 1, 2023

As blue tribe America slept: As we noted yesterday, the headline on Kate Cray's short piece asked an excellent question:

"How Should We Teach the Story of Our Country?" 

Especially given the recent dispute about a new Advanced Placement course, that headline was asking an excellent question! 

In a slightly different world, it could have triggered a lengthy discussion about our nation's history, such as it is. Also, about the kinds of frameworks we might build around our understanding of that topic.

How should American history be taught in the public schools? It would certainly start with the state of the Americas before European contact and in its immediate aftermath—with the history Charles Mann explored in his 2005 book, 1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus.

The story should start before 1492. Proceeding with all deliberate speed, it would soon reach 1619—a time "before the Mayflower."

That said, what frameworks should our public schools build around the exploration of the brutal behavior which is often involved? In a slightly better world, we could have had that discussion.

In fact, we don't live in any such world, and there's no sign that we will at any imaginable point. 

At present, tribal warfare tends to intrude on the possibility of some such discussion. All too often, the foolishness may come from within our own blue tribe, though we members of that tribe have a very hard time coming to terms with that fact.

This is no country for solid discussions! By now, that fact is quite clear. Consider what happened on Monday night when Tucker Carlson instructed millions of voters concerning where Covid came from.

We'll start with a disclaimer. Except in the most obvious way, we ourselves have no idea where Covid came from.

We don't know whether it came from a lab or from a Chinese "wet market." The disordered fellow who works for Fox News doesn't know where Covid came from either, but minor matters of that type rarely intrude on his lectures.

How many miles past clowncar stupid can it get on our major "news channels?"  Today, we'll show you part of the we saw, this past Monday night, when we watched the excitable fellow pretending to shape our understanding of this recent historical matter.

For starters, it's one of the heartbreaking ironies of modern "cable news" culture. The craziest presentations of all are given the cleanest transcription.

So it went on Monday night as Tucker fumed and posed. The transcript of the bulk of his monologue has been carefully proofread, and the videotape is also presented. The headline on the transcript says this:

TUCKER CARLSON: Why did people 'lie about the truth' of COVID's origins?

People had "lied about the truth!" Setting that odd construction to the side, we'll start as Carlson says this:

CARLSON (2/27/23): Nobody understands the principles of political venture capitalism better than, ironically, the communist Chinese government does. They paid Hunter Biden, too. And this weekend, we learned a little bit about what they got in return.

The Wall Street Journal reported the Biden administration has finally concluded that, yes, COVID was not naturally occurring. It didn't emerge organically from a pangolin, whatever that is, at a wet market, whatever that is. 

No, the virus came from a Chinese military lab where it was created. That's the determination of the Department of Energy, based on new intelligence that of course, everyone already had. 

As we mentioned yesterday, this fellow's misstatements come so think and so fast that it's virtually impossible for a fact-checker to keep up. And so it was in that short passage, which started with an unsupported, unexplained claim that the Chinese government was rewarded this weekend for having paid Hunter Biden.

That was just the appetizer. Instantly, viewers were handed this flat misstatement:

"The Wall Street Journal reported the Biden administration has finally concluded that, yes, COVID was not naturally occurring."

As you probably know, that isn't what the Journal reported. Also, it isn't what the Biden administration is known to have concluded. 

It isn't even "the determination of the Department of Energy," unless you include the fact that department has rated its degree of certainty as "low confidence." 

Also, the Department hasn't described the intelligence upon which it based that most likely / low confidence assessment. That said, had "everyone already had" that undefined intelligence?

Readers, please! This is Fox's excitable boy on one of his expeditions.

This week, pundits are asking why Rupert Murdoch, back in 2020, let Dobbs, Bartiromo, Pirro and Hannity pimp Sidney Powell's crazy claims about Dominion Voting Systems. We've seen no one ask why Murdoch lets his excitable boy go on the air with presentations like the one he offered this Monday night.

Setting that irony to the side, let's chart the fellow's performance:

Carlson had already given voice to multiple clowncar statements, including his silly reference to the pangolin. As he continued, he continued to suggest that the Biden administration now "knows" that Covid came out of a lab.

Does the Biden administration "know" that? As with everything else, everything is possible!

That said, Carlson never defended or supported his claim. Instead, he offered this:

CARLSON: Now we know all of that. Does Joe Biden still consider Vladimir Putin, he's so bad, the greatest threat to world peace and stability? It does seem like this story could overturn some of our previous assumptions. 

Well, Joe Biden's national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, went on CNN yesterday to answer precisely none of these questions. Instead, he told us, "We're still not sure where it came from." Watch this.

(Videotape begins)

DANA BASH: Did the coronavirus pandemic start in a lab? Is that what you believe now?

JAKE SULLIVAN: Well, Dana, there is a variety of views in the intelligence community. Some elements in the intelligence community have reached conclusions on one side, some on the other. A number of them have said they just don't have enough information to be sure. And if we gain any further insider information, we will share it with Congress, and we will share it with the American people. But right now, there is not a definitive answer that has emerged from the intelligence community on this question.

(Videotape ends)

CARLSON (mockingly): We just can't say for sure where COVID came from! There's no consensus! We're still debating it! 

Well, there's never a consensus in Washington about anything, particularly not with the intel agencies. They're lying! We know perfectly well COVID came from. We've known this for years. 

Sullivan's lying, the silly boy said. Without quite remembering to define his principal term, he said, "We've known this for years."

Who is this "we" to whom Tucker referred? And in what sense has this "we" known these things "for years?"

The excitable child proceeded to lay out his brief. As he did, it began to seem that he meant that he—possibly, he and his staff—had known these things for years. This is what he said: 

CARLSON (continuing from above): They're lying! We know perfectly well COVID came from. We've known this for years. 

In fact, one of the very first things we knew about COVID was that it was an engineered virus that escaped somehow, intentionally or not, from a Chinese military biolab in Wuhan. 

It was in early March of 2020, three full years ago, at the very beginning, that we did a long open on this show about the Chinese research paper whose authors later disappeared. Now, these Chinese scientific researchers scolded the Chinese government for the lax safety standards that they said allowed COVID to escape and infect the world. 

This was three years ago. Watch this.

He'd known it since March 2020, three years back, when he'd done a long open about a research paper! 

On the basis of that long open, we'd all known, for the past three years, that Covid escaped from a lab! Ever since that program, we'd all known that fact—but here was the tape he now played:

CARLSON (continuing from above): This was three years ago. Watch this.

(Videotape begins)

CARLSON (March 2020): In fact, the outbreak may have begun, not in a public meat market, but in a poorly run Chinese laboratory. Now, that's not our theory. Anyone who raises that theory on American television is attacked as a conspiracy monger. But this is a theory from a now censored Chinese paper, a draft paper posted in mid-February. 

Scientists at the South China University of Technology suggested the virus outbreak, coronavirus outbreak, began at the Wuhan Center for Disease Control, where an animal may have infected a researcher who then spread the disease outside the facility. 

The paper is explicit about this. We're going to quote it. "The killer coronavirus probably originated from a laboratory in Wuhan," end quote.

(Videotape ends)

CARLSON: So it's not like we did a lot of hard hitting reporting with our Chinese speaking staff. That paper was in English on the Internet and anyone who was interested could have found it. We were just interested. That's why we found it. And then we found someone who was there. 

Back in March of 2020, the child had found a paper on the Internet! Anyone could have found the paper, but only Carlson did!

Also, and most clownishly, be sure you understand this:

Carlson had only said, in that three-year-old broadcast, that Covid "may have begun" in a Chinese lab. He had described that as "a theory."

That Internet paper was "explicit," Carlson had said. He had said that he was going to quote it!

And then, Rupert Murdoch's silliest child did quote the paper he'd found on the Net! When he did, the paper had only said that Covid "probably" came from a lab. 

On Monday night, the silly child said that Sullivan was lying when he said that we still aren't sure where Covid originated. He seemed to say that he knows this based on a paper from three years ago—a paper whose authors had also said they weren't sure!

Carlson never explained why we should assume that anything in that research paper was actually accurate. As he proceeded, he fleshed out this last statement from above:

"And then we found someone who was there."

He was referring to Li Meng Yan, a Steve Bannon discovery and functionary whose claims, rightly or wrongly, have been widely challenged over the past several years. 

At this point, Carlson played tape of one of her interviews on his show from past years, without explaining why we should assume that her claims are accurate. Later, he introduced her for a brand-new guest appearance.

You can watch the videotape of that new appearance here. At that same site, Fox News summarizes what was said, this Monday night, in this manner:

CARNAHAN (2/28/23): Host Tucker Carlson asked Yan on Monday if she still believes the virus was intentionally released nearly three years after the pandemic started. 

"Of course, it was not an accident," she responded. 

[...]

Carlson suggested the Chinese government unleashed COVID to destroy Western economies and elevate their own position globally. 

Yan said based on the evidence she has seen and the source she has spoken to, the virus was "intentionally brought out of this strict lab and released in the community."

"However, I don't think the outbreak in Wuhan was intentional. I would say it was because [the] CCP government and the military scientists underestimated the transmissibility," she added. "That's why finally it got out of control and the cost [was] a local outbreak. However, we should know that [the] CCP government intentionally let it go all over the world to kill millions of people all over the world later."

Up to this point, Carlson had repeatedly said that he didn't know if the release of Covid has been intentional. Now, he effusively vouched for his star guest as she offered a different assessment.

Viewers were told that Covid was deliberately released by the Chinese government with the intention of killing millions of people all over the world. No doubt, we knew it all along, thanks to the papers Carlson and his staff have managed to find on the Net!

In the past few days, journalists have asked why Rupert Murdoch let Dobbs and Bartiromo clown in the way they did in November 2020. We've seen no one ask why Murdoch lets this baldly disordered boy go on the air at the present time.

As we noted yesterday, it's very. very. very hard to fact-check a program like Carlson's. As we told you yesterday, the leaps of logic and the fractured facts come at us thick and fast. They're accompanied by Carlson's smirk and sneers, and by his weird gales of laughter.

So how about it, Pilgrim? How should our American history be taught to the nation's kids?

No such discussion could ever occur within our broken journalistic / academic culture. At present, The Crazy comes from several directions, frequently joined by The Merely Stretched or Overwrought, and of course by The Dumb and The Performative and The Merely Ludicrous.

This has been happening for a long time. We started this site in 1998 because things had gotten so bad within the mainstream press.

Our own blue tribe is involved in this cultural breakdown, though we're generally unable to see this. Meanwhile, as Carlson thrashes and flails, mainstream reporters frisk Murdoch's lassitude from three years ago, except on Morning Joe.

Tomorrow: Maureen Dowd?


38 comments:

  1. The very best thing anyone can say about Tucker Carlson is that his condescending attitude towards the rubes on the Right has led to many unnecessary COVID deaths.
    Bless his heart.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He's still not "incomparable", because the entire Republican Party treats Republican voters like they're fools.

      Delete

  2. tl;dr

    Hmm. Let us start with the fact that the incomparable Tucker Carlson is still the least worst talking head of the establishment media. In fact, he is a true American hero, for bringing up -- from within the establishment! -- multiple tabooed topics, such as, for example, bioweapon labs in Ukraine, the massive terrorist act in Europe perpetrated by your, dear Bob, tribal leaders, and endless lies and atrocities of branch covidians.

    That said, we don't believe that "we know perfectly well [where] COVID came from". True, most likely it did come from a lab. But which lab, how it got released, and by whom -- this we don't know. And probably will never know.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mao really does serve a distasteful purpose. The Right was not injured by the stupid but by
    the willfully, passionately stupid. And we all saw the sickening lab Mao came from…..

    ReplyDelete
  4. Tucker is grotesque, but not far afield of say Bill Maher, who is also obsessed with the lab scenario. Bob is shocked, SHOCKED that
    this sort of thing is going on at Fox.
    He made a very conscious choice to
    look away from the right media, and the
    dolts who buy the product, just as
    things were really getting bad.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Different departments of government have differing confidence levels as to each theory of the origin of the pandemic.

      Even so, there was only one theory that could get you kicked off social media and called a racist.

      https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/26/us/politics/china-lab-leak-coronavirus-pandemic.html

      Delete
    2. Well said, Cecelia.

      Delete
    3. That's a lie Cecelia. You probably would get laughed at if you claimed it a deliberate bioweapon attack by China though.

      The idea that China engineered, then released a lab-made coronavirus echoes a fringe conspiracy theory alluded to by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and President Donald Trump in May.https://www.businessinsider.com/scientists-steve-bannon-coronavirus-engineered-chinese-bioweapon-2020-10

      In any case, it is indisputable that Trump inept handling of the pandemic is responsible for hundreds of thousands of unnecessary deaths. Turns out gaslighting a pandemic is not very smart.

      Delete
    4. anonymouse 6:56am, I didn’t endorse the lab leak theory. I didn’t endorse the zoological theory. Tucker did endorse the leak theory.

      I made the point that confidence levels in either theory differ as to govt agencies. That is salient info.

      If you could come out of your militant mindset for two seconds you might be able to ascertain such obvious distinctions.

      Delete
    5. BYW: the lab leak theory is not an automatic assumption that the leak was intentional.

      Delete
    6. No, it isn't, but it was suggested by Trump and a whole bunch of your friends.

      My point is, nobody got kicked off social media or called a racist simply by arguing that it came from a lab leak. Who started calling it "the China Virus"? To this day, it is not clear what happened.

      Delete
    7. Anonymouse 8.23am, people got suspended on both YouTube and Twitter for peddling disinformation by venturing that the pandemic started as a lab leak rather than a natural spread from the wet market to humans.

      Yes, we don’t know what happened and we were/are having to work with and seek information from a totalitarian repressive foreign regime.

      That’s the point.

      It is the China virus no matter how it originated.

      Delete
    8. Well, if they were peddling disinformation, then YouTube has a right to do that. Or do you prefer right wing magats have a right to peddle disinformation on any platform they choose? No one got suspended for simply suggesting that it might have been a lab leak (not a weaponized attack from China)

      Anthony Fauci, the retiring top official in the United States response to the Covid-19 pandemic, said Sunday he has “a completely open mind” about the origins of the respiratory virus.

      “I have a completely open mind about that, despite people saying that I don’t,” Fauci said, when asked on NBC’s “Meet the Press” about the theory that the virus may have leaked from a lab in China in 2019.


      I can't tell you how stupid you sound when you state "it is the China virus". Good God.

      Delete
    9. Anonymouse 10:52am, so you first called me a liar when you thought I was endorsing the lab leak theory.

      Now you quote Fauci as having an open mind about all the theories of origin as to the pandemic.

      You tell me that contrary to my statement, no one was deplatformed for endorsing the leak theory, now you say it was perfectly rightful when they were.

      When you decide you want to do more than yell “no”, let me know.

      Delete
    10. Learn how to read, Cecelia. I quoted Fauci to prove to you that a lab leak possibility was never a controversial opinion and never a cause to deplatform for spreading disinformation.

      I really don't know why YouTube or Twitter might have suspended someone as you claim, but I am pretty sure it didn't happen for suggesting that possibility,

      Now go run along and see if you can invent another reason to play the aggrieved victim today.

      Delete
    11. The evil Dr. Fauci who is about to be placed on the rack by those pygmy insurrectionists who now control the House.

      Delete
    12. Anonymouse 11:58am, sure.

      Feast your eyes on the progression of Facebook policy.

      https://about.fb.com/news/2020/04/covid-19-misinfo-update/#removing-more-false-claims

      Delete
    13. And there’s was more good news even at Twitter.

      https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/02/27/new-report-covid-19-origin-puts-social-media-gops-crosshairs/

      Delete
    14. You're funny, Cecelia. You start out making an unproven claim that poor magat snowflakes are getting suspended from YouTube and Twitter and as proof you send a link to Facebook notice explaining why they will "remove some posts". Do you know the difference between between suspending an account and removing a single post?

      ***************
      Update on May 26, 2021 at 3:30PM PT:

      In light of ongoing investigations into the origin of COVID-19 and in consultation with public health experts, we will no longer remove the claim that COVID-19 is man-made or manufactured from our apps. We’re continuing to work with health experts to keep pace with the evolving nature of the pandemic and regularly update our policies as new facts and trends emerge.
      *********************

      Did you happen to catch the Senate hearing with AG Garland yesterday. The entire fucking lineup of Republican Senators was one long non-stop whinefest. The Church Of the Perpetually Aggrieved. My God, grow the fuck up.

      Delete
    15. Actually, Anonymouse 2:07pm, this is the way I started out:

      “Different departments of government have differing confidence levels as to each theory of the origin of the pandemic.

      Even so, there was only one theory that could get you kicked off social media and called a racist.

      https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/26/us/politics/china-lab-leak-cor”

      You told deplatforming never happened.

      Now your response is that it’s just old news.

      Since you first called me a liar, you’ve turned yourself into a pretzel trying to defend that charge.

      Delete
    16. That's right, Cecelia. Those were the two baseless accusations you made, and thus far you haven't backed up either one.

      You said "kicked off social media" and "called a racist" for suggesting the virus came from a lab leak. Which never happened.

      Delete
  5. "Especially given the recent dispute about a new Advanced Placement course,"

    There is no real dispute about the course. Having a "dispute" would require that the FL Board of Education state some actual concerns about it, something specific that could be addressed. They did not do that, according to the College Board (who were there to resolve issues with them).

    This is a political stunt by DeSantis. Treating it like DeSantis has valid concerns when he has stated none, just encourages the misunderstanding that there was something wrong with the course, when there is not.

    Why did DeSantis choose to use the African American Studies AP course for this purpose? Because it is a racial course that is sure to evoke strong reactions from his most bigoted supporters, and that is how Republicans get out the vote.

    Meanwhile, Somerby pretends there is some actual question about how to teach AP history. There is not. You leave the teaching to the trained experts (people called "teachers") and you let the kids who have chosen to take the course learn something. And you keep the politicians out of the equation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. DeSantis signs bill that gives him more control of Disney’s special district

      This is what David in Cal means by voting for the conservative party because he favors smaller government.

      Because it is a racial course that is sure to evoke strong reactions from his most bigoted supporters, and that is how Republicans get out the vote.

      Of course, do you think these bigoted supporters would ever get off their asses to vote for Rinos like Paul Ryan?

      Delete
  6. "In a slightly better world, we could have had that discussion.

    In fact, we don't live in any such world, and there's no sign that we will at any imaginable point. "

    Actually, we do live in such a world. Somerby pretends that one backwater state such as FL is the whole world. Students are discussing history throughout the remaining 49 states. And why does Somerby pretend that the USA is the whole world? That's a bit histrionic, even for him.

    DeSantis, with his stunt, is damaging the kids in FL but he isn't president and most likely won't be. That means he cannot dictate what happens in the other states. What is in it for Somerby to exaggerate the reach and power of these goons in the Republican party?

    FL students will eventually graduate from high school and if they are smart, will choose out-of-state colleges to attend. There, they will have every opportunity to learn about even Florida's brutal history (have you seen what an alligator's teeth look like?). To their parents' dismay, they will find better jobs in the blue states and become Democrats. But it serves their parents right. They could have stopped DeSantis but didn't.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "This is no country for solid discussions! By now, that fact is quite clear."

    To emphasize this point, Somerby sicced his trolls on the comment section last night, and they went batshit crazy. Point taken.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "Except in the most obvious way, we ourselves have no idea where Covid came from."

    What the hell does that mean? Is Somerby giving a wink and a nod to circulating conspiracy theories when he says "the most obvious way" or is he saying that baby viruses come from mommy viruses?

    Why doesn't Somerby ever say what he means?

    ReplyDelete
  9. It is fine that Somerby calls Carlson a liar, finally. But why does he have to quote so extensively from Carlson's show, providing all the evidence that Carlson presented to back up his lie, and why does he give so much space to repeating the details of Carlson's lie?

    Somerby could have summarized Carlson's lie in one or two sentences. Instead he gives Carlson more exposure and repeats the disinformation that Carlson himself spread on his own show. How does that help to fact check or correct anything Carlson said?

    This kind of "criticism" helps Carlson and the Republicans misinform the public. It makes sure that liberals (who do not watch Fox and Carlson) get the same dirt and Carlson's viewers do. In that sense, it is irresponsible of Somerby himself to be repeating Carlson's garbage, under the guise of telling everyone what WE already know, that Carlson is a liar and spreader of right wing disinformation.

    If China were really creating a virus to spread to the rest of the world, why would they release it in their own country first? Why would they not protect their own people with an antidote or treatment? And why would they now be abandoning their own people by stopping the effective zero-covid procedures that protected them? And what exactly did China gain by creating the pandemic? Be specific in your answers. These are common sense questions that neither Carlson nor Somerby has addressed.

    What is wrong with Carlson's speculation (which he calls truth)? It creates animosity against China and his right wing followers are too stupid to differentiate between Chinese-Americans and Chinese people in China. Or they are too lazy to find the right targets so they just attack whoever is nearby (as a symbolic gesture, except they don't know what symbolism means). So the main harm is to the fools who think China created a virus but won't do anything to protect themselves from it, because this isn't the only conspiracy theory circulating. Others think Bill Gates did it in order to implant nanochips into humans via the vaccine, so that he can what, rule the world like Goldfinger?

    In my opinion, Somerby should think twice and even three times before he circulates the harmful lies spread by Carlson. An actual debunker would include the debunking part, the facts, but Somerby shrugs and says anything is possible and he doesn't know what is what in the world, much less FL, but here, listen to more of what Carlson said.

    No actual liberal would expend such meticulous care in repeating the actual full content of the lies told on Fox, the way Somerby does today. No liberal would help Carlson spread the good news, the way Somerby does.

    ReplyDelete
  10. "As we noted yesterday, it's very. very. very hard to fact-check a program like Carlson's. As we told you yesterday, the leaps of logic and the fractured facts come at us thick and fast. They're accompanied by Carlson's smirk and sneers, and by his weird gales of laughter.

    So how about it, Pilgrim? How should our American history be taught to the nation's kids?"

    Notice the juxtaposition of Carlson's lies with American history, as if the AP course were full of lies like Carlson's show is. Somerby seems to be implying that if we cannot stop Carlson from spreading his lies, how will be know whether an AP course is telling the truth? But that isn't really the problem with the AP course at all. No one suggested there were lies in the course content -- not even DeSantis or the FL Board of Education.

    Historical Truth is determined by historians, not Tucker Carlson. There are published books that have been reviewed by scholars. The College Board formed a committee of historians and other experts to create the course, using both secondary and primary (such as historical documents, archives, interviews with people who were there). This isn't a matter of people making stuff up, the way Carlson does.

    Somerby thinks that by equating historical evidence with Carlson's propaganda, he can confuse his readers about how we know what is true and what is false. He thinks he can discredit scholarship to the point where people will set it aside in favor of the pleasing lies told by the right wing. A person who devotes his life to knowing the truth about Jim Crow or desegregation of the Boston schools or some similar topic, is not equivalent to Carlson, who makes a great deal of money telling lies to Republicans and other hapless viewers in order to sway votes and increase stock prices for Murdoch. These two people are in no way the same.

    One thing is the same -- the slimy way that Somerby attacks knowledge without even saying a word, never expressing an actual opinion, letting the side-by-side implied comparison do his dirty work. That leaves airheads who don't notice implication to argue that Somerby is innocent of bad intentions -- he just wants us all to know that Carlson is a huge liar, something we ALL already knew. While Somerby tells his own, more subtle lies about the content of AP history classes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is almost as if Somerby is suggesting that folks like Tucker Carlson will be teaching AP courses, or that AP courses are full of lies like Carlson's show, and parents won't be able to fact-check them. They won't, of course. And the fact-checking is done before the course is made available to teachers, by historians, so that parents don't have to worry about it. Unless someone like Somerby comes along and tries to generate fear about what kids will be told.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. Anonymices, what it’s like is that Somerby is damned if he does address Tucker’s remarks specifically and damned when he doesn’t address them specifically.

      It’s almost like you think it’s fine when the people who agree with you get concerned about what is and isn’t being taught, but want other parents in general to shut the heck up and leave the driving to some academic “expert” when your priorities are questioned.

      As long as your priorities are sanctioned, you call it a group effort by fed and state authorities, journos, academic experts and involved parents.

      But if you’re not getting your way, it’s “sit down and shut up political hacks and racist peasants”

      Delete
  11. "At present, The Crazy comes from several directions, frequently joined by The Merely Stretched or Overwrought, and of course by The Dumb and The Performative and The Merely Ludicrous."

    Somerby presents a huge example of crazy coming from the right, via Tucker Carlson. Then he switches gears and without presenting any examples whatsoever, suggests that the crazy is coming from the left too. Except it isn't.

    "This has been happening for a long time. We started this site in 1998 because things had gotten so bad within the mainstream press. Our own blue tribe is involved in this cultural breakdown, though we're generally unable to see this."

    Somerby offers no evidence whatsoever of this assertion about the mainstream press and "our own blue tribe" (which Somerby is not a member of). His only statement about the left is that Morning Joe didn't discuss Murdoch when Somerby thought he should have, even though many other programs did. And note again that Somerby defines the mainstream media as excluding Fox and Carlson, as belonging to the blue tribe (except it doesn't).

    No evidence. None at all. That makes this conclusion of Somerby's just another attack on the left and the mainstream media. As if there is anyone at all in the mainstream media who tells a constant stream of vicious deliberate irresponsible lies, the way Carlson does.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Speaking of lies:

    "U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene on Tuesday falsely claimed that President Joe Biden was to blame for a congressional witness’s family tragedy, the deaths of two of the mother’s children from fentanyl. But when a top CNN fact-checker asked the Georgia Republican’s spokesperson why she made that claim, when the children died the year before Biden became president during the Trump administration, the response was a terse and profanity-laden email."

    ReplyDelete
  13. “That said, what frameworks should our public schools build around the exploration of the brutal behavior which is often involved? In a slightly better world, we could have had that discussion.”

    What does Somerby think is going on other than a discussion? Does he think now is the only time in our history when this question has been debated?

    The McMinn County school board meeting that he linked to yesterday is a microcosm of the debate. The proponents of using Maus presented their case clearly and respectfully, and the others made their case.

    Here in Arkansas, the public are invited to come to the legislature to speak for or against pending bills. But, once a law is passed by the state legislature, that sort of forestalls any further discussion. The curriculum has now, more or less, been set in stone in Florida.

    As far as the AP course, I don’t know if that came out of the Florida legislature, or was an edict from DeSantis or the board of education, in which case, there may have been no public discussion.

    It’s also odd to me that Somerby says things like “DeSantis may be right”, but ignores the other thing that that statement implies, which is that he may be wrong. I doubt DeSantis or his followers think he is anything but right. There’s no reason liberals can’t find him to be wrong and disagree with him, especially now that he has cut off any discussion of the matter. Disagreeing with someone is part of a discussion. I get the feeling Somerby just wants liberals to give in on this, or just shut up.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Here is a cogent response to Tucker Carlson's disinformation, which Somerby so kindly repeated here today:

    https://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2023/02/past-right-wing-conspiracy-theories-are.html

    ReplyDelete
  15. Here is a cogent discussion of why the right wing response to covid has prevented serious talk about the need for improved lab safety, assuming covid originated in a lab at all:

    https://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2023/03/right-wing-demagoguery-is-why.html

    This suggests that even if the right wing theories were right, their reaction has prevented any reasonable discussion of serious topics. This is also an example of how someone with Somerby's views about discussion might approach media criticism in a serious way.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Hey Bob, critique something uplifting…the story of. Bill Russell and the Boston Celtics now playing on Netflix

    ReplyDelete
  17. "Our own blue tribe is involved in this cultural breakdown, though we're generally unable to explain how."

    There you go, Bob. I fixed your quote for accuracy.

    ReplyDelete