"Rot in hell," former president says!

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 3, 2024

Part of his Christmas Day message: Late last week, Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) wrote a guest essay for the New York Times. 

The essay appeared in yesterday's print editions. It concerned the Christmas message of former President Donald J. Trump.

Dingell's essay begins as shown, headline included:

How to Stand Up to Trump

“Rot in hell.”

Those words were part of Donald Trump’s Christmas Day message, spewed at his political enemies. The next day, when I was asked during a CNN interview about the increased violence in this country, I responded honestly that I thought the former president’s message was wrong and divisive. I’m not afraid to say what I think, even when that means there may be unpleasant repercussions and threats from the former president and his supporters. A lot of us may face this type of conflict in the year ahead. 

Trump's message had included the words, "Rot in hell!" We thought we'd show you the full text of what the former president said.

For reasons which may or may not make sense, news orgs are often reluctant to do that. At Salon, Gabriella Ferrigine went ahead and broke the rules. As you can see through her report, here's the full text of Trump's Christmas Day posts on Truth Social:

Merry Christmas to all, including Crooked Joe Biden’s ONLY HOPE, Deranged Jack Smith, the out of control Lunatic who just hired outside attorneys, fresh from the SWAMP (unprecedented!), to help him with his poorly executed WITCH HUNT against ‘TRUMP’ and ‘MAGA.'

Included also are World Leaders, both good and bad, but none of which are as evil and ‘sick’ as the THUGS we have inside our Country who, with their Open Borders, INFLATION, Afghanistan Surrender, Green New Scam, High Taxes, No Energy Independence, Woke Military, Russia/Ukraine, Israel/Iran, All Electric Car Lunacy, and so much more, are looking to destroy our once great USA. MAY THEY ROT IN HELL. AGAIN, MERRY CHRISTMAS!

"MAY THEY ROT IN HELL," the candidate said. "AGAIN, MERRY CHRISTMAS!" 

Ferrigine also included the texts of Trump's posts on Christmas Eve. You can also see those texts at Salon, with links to all the originals at Truth Social.

For reasons which may or may not make sense, many news orgs try to avoid presenting the texts of such posts. Concerning those posts, we'll say this:

It has long been our assumption that the person composing those furious texts is some version of (severely) "mentally ill." That was the consensus viewpoint in The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump: 27 Psychiatrists and Mental Health Experts Assess a President, the 2017 best-seller edited by Yale psychiatrist Bandy X. Lee. 

The book was ignored by the mainstream press. Eventually, Dr. Lee lost her job at Yale.

We've long noted a basic fact. For better or worse, no such possibility can be stated, discussed or assessed by employees of our major news orgs. This informal agreement dates all the way back to the time of the so-called Goldwater Rule.

We'll guess that Rep. Dingell also thinks that Trump is severely disordered. That said, the full texts of his Christmas posts aren't included in her essay. 

This default to a type of silence is standard. We're not even saying that decision is "wrong." But can a nation survive this way, or has it already collapsed?

116 comments:

  1. Somerby was once upset when the networks kept airing Trump’s Covid briefings. He also attacked the media for giving trump lots of free air time by airing his campaign rallies in 2016. Now Somerby calls for giving MORE air time to Trump’s calculated hate speech?

    ReplyDelete
  2. It's sad and amusing for a naïve person who doesn't understand high-level expertise to therefore assume that the expert must be mentally ill. Trump is an expert persuader. His words were expertly chosen to get attention and to promote his POV on the issue.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What!? Bob is a naive person who doesn’t understand high-level expertise? How dare you, David.

      Delete
    2. Well, they certainly persuade creeps like you David.

      Delete
    3. Just because Trump mimics Hitler doesn't mean he has Hitler's rhetorical skills. Trump is making a lot of gaffes and repetitious meandering in his recent speeches that suggest he is becoming a less effective communicator. Hitler didn't have the chance to get dementia. I don't see any expertise in his statements or his posts on Truth Social, and there is certainly no POV in the quoted message beyond "Rot in Hell" to his enemies.

      If Trump is such a great persuader, why is his base diminishing?

      Delete
    4. You're such a two-faced bastard, David.

      Delete
    5. The tragedy of David began when he let Zionism poison his soul.

      Delete
    6. Zionism is an obsolete term used for propaganda purposes by anti-semites and pro-Palestinians.

      Delete
    7. 3:37 As noted in an earlier post, Alan Dershowitz is a self-described Zionist. It has a specific meaning which you should look up instead of wallowing in ignorance. It is used by a subset of Jews to describe themselves and is not anything you suggest it is.

      Delete
    8. Dershowitz is old enough to have been around before the formation of Israel. He may be an actual Zionist. That doesn't mean the term is relevant now, nor that it isn't being used for propaganda purposes. I have no idea what he means by it. I am not saying the term never existed.

      Delete
    9. If knowing one's audience is tantamount to being a great orator, Donald J. Trump qualifies. Otherwise, to the rest of us, he sounds like an idiot. There is a reason why he got carted off to the hospital for an unscheduled Saturday visit to perform a mental status test. One that required identifying silhouettes of zoo animals . A test that he described as difficult and was proud of passing. No one has ever adequately explained that event. But there is no need to speculate about one thing: it is an exam given specifically to assess mental competency at the most basic level.

      "That's right, Mr. President, it's a giraffe! You can head on back to the White House now."

      Delete
    10. Conservatives criticize liberals for not paying enough attention to actual results. Conservatives say say that liberals pay more attention to intentions of various government programs than to the results of those programs.

      Some of the criticisms of Trump in this post don't pay enough attention to results. A man with no government experience, who was opposed by most of the media and by much of the federal bureaucracy, including the FBI and spy agencies nevertheless managed to defeat a strong group of Republicans to win the nomination and then got elected President. This remarkable achievement demonstrates that Trump has extraordinary persuasive skills

      Delete
    11. David, these harridans hit you like this endlessly. Bob is the only person they treat more scathingly.

      A good “Rot in hell” on your part would be understandable. Maybe a “You’re not right.”

      Delete
    12. Cecelia, butt out. This doesn't concern you.

      Delete
    13. Anonymouse 7:05pm, oh, please.
      It’s the same shite, different day.

      And too, if there was anyone who waxed sanctimonious and divisive over Hillary Clinton’s feet of clay, it was Democrats in 2009.

      Delete
    14. Cecelia, I believe one can deduce from David’s original comment that he must think Bob is naive and doesn’t understand high level expertise, because Bob is the only one calling Trump mentally ill in this post. That was my meaning at 2:02. Because I happen to believe trump is using calculated hate speech, and that his rant wasn’t evidence of mental illness.

      Delete
    15. Anonymouse 7:36 pm, did you happen to read the reactions as to David’s comments? Do anonymices think that Trump is correct based upon his worldly expertise?

      David thinks that Trump is a genius persecuted by the powers that be and Bob thinks Trump is fornicating pecans and that THIS judgment, if emphasized by the left and the media, would the definitive way to end him.

      On other hand, anonymices have to play it all ways to Sunday to shoot down Bob, as their chief target, and David as their natural enemy.

      You’re so tyrannical and disingenuous.

      Delete
    16. @7:04 wrote "Evaluation of results has been a mandatory part of every government contract (grant) I've been part of" I believe you. Yet, when one looks more broadly than at specific projects, the results are glaring.

      -- The US has spent several trillion dollars fighting poverty, yet poverty, ignorance, and crime continue to dominate the inner cities. The results say that the entire basic approach isn't working.

      -- the US military hasn't had a victory in a long time. Clearly our military policies are not producing a military as effective as it should be.

      -- Survey show little or no improvement in critical thinking after 4 years of college. College education isn't working right.

      -- Affirmative action in college acceptance results in a majority of black students not graduating in 4 years and very few blacks graduating in STEM. This is explained by the mismatch between black students and the college they're attending. That is, the gap between many black students and their classmates. But, liberals stubbornly hang onto racial preferences, even when means breaking the law as set by the Supreme Court.

      These are gross examples of terrible failures by our government. Yet, liberals don't offer many new solutions,. In fact, IMO, liberals don't give proper recognition to the lack of success.

      Delete
    17. Sucks Corby/Parry/a is back with her psycho trolling.

      Delete
    18. Yes, Cecelia, we’re all so “tyrannical and disingenuous”, as opposed to you, David and Bob, who are fair-minded, open, and totally honest and without ulterior motive or malice. All this because some of us criticize the great Somerby.

      Delete
    19. You didn’t read the comments to that post. They took care of it well by listing programs that obviously do work.

      Poverty decreased substantially with Johnson’s war on poverty programs then the rate went back up when those programs were cut or discontinued. Google a graph of poverty rates from 1964 to the present.

      Sex education works to reduce teen pregnancy. It does less well than abstinance only programs at reducing STDs.

      Some college majors do better than others at critical thinking. There is no reason why a phys ed or business major or engineering or art major should help critical thinking. When you average all the majors together it is hard to see a significant result.

      4 years is not the usual time span for examining graduation rates (someone is cooking the books). The usual comparison is 6-year graduation rate. The main factor affecting graduation is money, funds to continue attending. The lack of funds is more likely to be an obstacle for black students.

      Cherry picking results to portray Dem programs as ineffective is a form of propaganda and disinformation. The right likes to tell such stories. Like the one about how increased school funding doesn’t improve academic performance or the one about smaller class sizes not impacting test scores.

      Delete
    20. Oh, yes, anonymouse 8:22pm, you are tyrannical and disingenuous. Every day and in every way.

      It’s why you’re here to punish the heresy of thinking that you don’t have all your shite together.

      Oh, the humanity!

      Delete
    21. I fornicate pecans. I am Corby.

      Delete
    22. @8:30 you assert that anti-poverty programs were cut or discontinued. My impression is that anti-poverty spending was enormous and remains enormous. Here's one data point form 2011

      CRS identified 83 overlapping federal welfare programs that together represented the single largest budget item in 2011—more than the nation spends on Social Security, Medicare, or national defense. The total amount spent on these 80-plus federal welfare programs amounts to roughly $1.03 trillion. Importantly, these figures solely refer to means-tested welfare benefits

      Do you have any figures or cites, ideally year by year, showing anti-poverty spending?

      Delete
    23. @8:30 wrote "Sex education works to reduce teen pregnancy."

      Actual results were the opposite. I remember when sex education became a standard part of the school curriculum. In that period the amount of teen pregnancy exploded. This is an example where good intentions failed to match actual results.

      Delete
    24. Please post a link or a cite to that study. Those programs have been evaluated and I’ve seen the results. If you are just comparing teen pregnancy result across years and not evaluating specific programs (with controls) there are too many other factors that may have produced an increase. Closing Planned Parenthood clinics where teens get birth control is one example of a confounding factor. Teen pregnancy did not explode with sex education. That’s total nonsense.

      Delete
    25. David, the poverty rate before Johnson started the War on Poverty, in 1960, was 23%. In 2015, it was 13% and it was 11.5% in 2022. That suggests that poverty programs work. This data comes from the UC Davis Center for Poverty Research.

      https://poverty.ucdavis.edu/faq/what-current-poverty-rate-united-states

      The census says: "In 2019, government assistance helped lift 23.4 million people out of official poverty and 31.5 million people out of SPM poverty.

      In 2020, the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, government assistance removed 29.6 million people from official poverty, 6.2 million more people than in 2019. This reflects expanded unemployment benefits in response to the recession in 2020. The number of people kept out of official poverty by government assistance fell to 25.7 million in 2021." Census.gov

      https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2022/09/government-assistance-lifts-millions-out-of-poverty.html#:~:text=In%202019%2C%20government%20assistance%20helped,more%20people%20than%20in%202019.

      Debt.org says:

      "In the late 1950s, the poverty rate in the U.S. was approximately 22%, with just shy of 40 million Americans living in poverty. The rate declined steadily, reaching a low of 11.1% in 1973 and rising to a high of nearly 15% three times – in 1983, 1993 and 2011 – before hitting the all-time low of 10.5% in 2019."

      Note that 1983 and 1993 corresponds to years when there were major changes to welfare programs by Reagan and Clinton. Poverty went up to its highest points since instituting the War on Poverty.

      These are actual numbers from reputable sources. Your statement that the war on poverty has not worked is absolutely false.

      Delete
    26. "In relation to material deprivation, welfare payments have reduced poverty. In fact, a 2018 study by John Early for the Cato Institute suggests that if all benefits and other factors are fully accounted for, the true poverty rate may be under 3 percent. (The Census Bureau calculates the official poverty measure by comparing pretax monetary income to the cost of a minimum food diet. The poverty rate does not take noncash benefits into account.) Other studies are more cautious but still suggest that welfare programs reduce poverty rates by half or more. Then again, those studies also suggest that most of the gains took place in the early years of those programs and that the marginal gains of additional spending in recent years have been minimal (Figure 2)."

      Cato Institute
      https://www.cato.org/cato-handbook-policymakers/cato-handbook-policymakers-9th-edition-2022/poverty-welfare

      What this means is that with the poverty rate close to 3% (considering all sources of help, state and local not just federal), there is little improvement to be had by increasing spending. Most of the gains in reducing poverty occurred at the beginning of the programs, which is what would be expected given that not much was being done before Johnson's War on Poverty. But look what happened during covid! Without the immediate help provided by all levels of government, poverty rates would have been much higher and the amount of suffering during the pandemic would have been much greater. This is one of the successes of the poverty programs.

      Looking at the graph, the true poverty rate is not plotted (only the official rate), but if it were, it would show a steep decline inversely related to the equally steep increase in combined spending, especially with the onset of covid.

      This graph answers your question about all anti-poverty spending, year by year.

      Delete
    27. Go read LBJ's goals for the war on poverty, and you will see that these goals were not achieved. LBJ claimed that the War on Poverty would be temporary. He said that his program would end poverty, and there would be no need to continue it. Instead, anti-poverty spending is over a trillion dollars a year, with no end in sight.

      Or, do the math. A 10.5% poverty rate would be around 32 million people. Spending of over a trillion dollars would be around $31,000 per person, or $125,000 for a family of four. Having 32 million people mired in poverty despite this level of spending is not success.

      Delete
    28. 6:15 There are self-proclaimed Zionists colonizing the West Bank currently. Try keeping up.

      Delete
    29. "opposed by most of the media "
      Please David. For the love of an all-knowing benevolent God, please kindly go fuck yourself with a rusty saw.

      Delete
    30. Putting the homeless in charge of Wall Street is a win-win.

      Delete
    31. Unamused: https://jewishstudies.washington.edu/israel-hebrew/why-israel-isnt-a-settler-colonial-state/

      Delete
    32. "why-israel-isnt-a-settler-colonial-state"

      It's not a settler-colonial state. It's a settler-colonial entity.

      Delete
  3. Can’t help noticing that it’s Trump trump Trump mentally ill all the time at this blog. Almost as if trump is an important topic.

    ReplyDelete

  4. "The book was ignored by the mainstream press. Eventually, Dr. Lee lost her job at Yale.The book was ignored by the mainstream press. Eventually, Dr. Lee lost her job at Yale."

    Thank you for this, Bob. I am now convinced: the mainstream press is funded by Russia via Iran and Qatar.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The book was discussed multiple times on Lawrence O’Donnell’s show, as Somerby knows.

      Delete
    2. Dr Lee violated the ethics of the APA, her professional organization, by diagnosing someone remotely and without examination. Beyond that, she lost her job at Yale because she was no longer qualified to work with patients in that state because her license to practice was not renewed. Yale also decided that the project she had been participating on did not need her services any more, she hadn't worked with them in a while. If someone has a courtesy appointment and they are not performing any services for the university, the appointment will be terminated, not just at Yale but anywhere. Dr. Lee continues to practice in New York City where she is licensed and employed.

      Somerby implies that her loss of her Yale job was retaliatory or meant to suppress her views, but it seems coincidental. Her publicity may have called attention to the fact that she was no longer performing any work at Yale and had no license in CT. Major universities do not like having tenuously affiliated people trading on the school's reputation to bolster their own credibility, without providing any reciprocal value to the college.

      Delete
    3. anon 2:21, you bring up some good context about the Lee "firing" by Yale. Dr. Lee brought a lawsuit against Yale which she lost. If you look for it, you can find the court decision. [If there has been any further appeals on the case since I looked at it several months ago, that could change the picture, but I doubt it]. what you say about her non-paying position is correct. i believe she also wrote that Alan Dershowitz was a psychopath [not saying she was wrong about this], and he complained about that to Yale, and I think that might have been an element in Dr. Lee's involuntary departure. This is one obsession that TDH has which I think departs from rationality - that the press covers up that Trump is, or might be, seriously mentally ill. TDH is a layman here, as I am. I do have a little knowledge on the subject, which as they say, may be a dangerous thing. There are all kinds of mental illnesses. Some are obvious in the sense that the illness seriously causes harm to the sufferer- schizophrenia, paranoia, OCD, severe depression etc. These types of conditions, to some degree or another, can hamper one's functioning in life. Trump certainly functions, even getting elected POTUS. He talks the way plenty of average Schmoes talk, and not like a polished politician. D in C's earlier remark has some truth to it. I would wager that a large percentage of the population, maybe almost everyone, has some degree of a psychiatric condition. That Bandy Lee and 26 other shrinks wrote a book doesn't mean that their opinion is universal amongst the shrink world.
      But even if TDH hits it on the nose that Trump is seriously clinically nuts, what does TDH think would happen if the press suddenly flogged the idea that trump was mentally ill? why does he think that might change the dynamic? Aside from the fact that the type of mental illness TDH thinks Trump has isn't like having cancer or psoriasis - there's a lot of subjectivity and value judgment in such a diagnosis, [As an added observation, there actually is, or was, a documentary on Netflix where the whole subject was that Trump was mentally ill.]

      Delete
    4. Mental illness is in the eye of the beholder. In the Soviet Union, for example, opposing the political establishment was a symptom of mental illness ("sluggish schizophrenia"). That's probably the illness Donald Trump has, in Bob's TDS-affected mind.

      As for the propaganda outlets not using it as a talking point too much, there could be various reason for that. Lawsuits, for example? Or, perhaps it's deemed counterproductive for achieving propaganda outlets' goals, at this time? Who knows.

      Delete
    5. A better way to say this might be that mental illness has been used before as an excuse to lock up people for political or other purposes. They used to lock women up in mental hospitals for refusing to obey their husbands or for adultery. Those past abuses of diagnoses are a main reason why states require licensing of mental health professionals and why we are leery when people throw those labels around too freely.

      "Mental illness is in the eye of the beholder."

      No. To achieve consistency of diagnosis, panels of psychologists and psychiatrists have compiled diagnostic criteria for specific diagnostic labels (schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, OCD, antisocial personality disorder, autism spectrum disorder). Someone cannot just slap a label on someone without there being observable behaviors fitting those criteria. That prevents insurance fraud but also abuse of the system of various sorts, including political stigmatizing of a candidate or putting away someone who has become inconvenient to others or to seize their assets. Somerby's disregard of the need to be cautious with labeling is one of the things I dislike most about his essays here.

      In the bad old days, someone could be locked up and have a terrible time getting let out when someone misused such diagnoses for personal gain or to harm others. Lives were ruined (look up Frances Farmer, for example).

      "Frances Elena Farmer was an American actress and television hostess. She appeared in over a dozen feature films, though she garnered notoriety for sensationalized accounts of her life, especially her involuntary commitment to psychiatric hospitals and subsequent mental health struggles."

      Delete
    6. A physician isn't going to call someone diabetic without doing a blood glucose test (A1C typically). There are specific ranges for results with cutoffs for being diabetic as opposed to pre-diabetic (slightly high) or normal. Similarly, there are a range of tests that mental health practitioners use to diagnose mental conditions of various kinds. These are used in the context of a face-to-face interview with a trained professional, who interprets them to diagnose a patient and determine what kind of treatment may be appropriate. This is not haphazard or subjective or off-the-cuff. There are rules for using assessments (tests of various kinds) and for interpreting and reporting results. This process cannot be skipped to express an opinion of someone in the media such as Trump or Tucker Carlson (who Somerby persists in diagnosing as traumatized by his father's divorce, even though most children are not affected that way).

      The idea that there is no body of knowledge, no research literature, no skill involved in diagnosing or treating someone who is mentally ill is based on ignorance about the current state of the profession. Somerby shows his disregard for expertise when he presumes to diagnose Trump and Tucker Carlson in primitive ways that tend ot excuse their misbehavior and minimize their wrongdoing. That is frustrating to those of us who do have training, and to those of us who are not inclined to give Trump a pass because he is insane or crazy (unscientific terms).

      Delete
    7. Ironically you're arguing with a psychopath (Mao) about mental illness.

      Delete
    8. @5:59 PM

      Yes, "mental illness" is, quite obviously, in the eye of the beholder. Defined and determined by people, not by Gods, as you apparently imagine.

      Delete
  5. If the media has been silent about anything, it’s the 60 year history of corruption and dirty tricks perpetrated by the Republican Party, from Nixon, through Reagan and up to and including its support for trump and January 6. But these are precisely the types of things Somerby mockingly calls “putting the others in jail.” Mustn’t offend those right wing voters, so, keep them in the dark, I guess.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "This informal agreement dates all the way back to the time of the so-called Goldwater Rule."

    Journalists may adhere to such a rule, but psychologists and psychiatrists have binding rules too. Here is the relevant constraint in the APA's Code of Ethics:

    "9.01 Bases for Assessments
    (a) Psychologists base the opinions contained in their recommendations, reports, and diagnostic or evaluative statements, including forensic testimony, on information and techniques sufficient to substantiate their findings. (See also Standard 2.04, Bases for Scientific and Professional Judgments .)

    (b) Except as noted in 9.01c , psychologists provide opinions of the psychological characteristics of individuals only after they have conducted an examination of the individuals adequate to support their statements or conclusions. When, despite reasonable efforts, such an examination is not practical, psychologists document the efforts they made and the result of those efforts, clarify the probable impact of their limited information on the reliability and validity of their opinions, and appropriately limit the nature and extent of their conclusions or recommendations. (See also Standards 2.01, Boundaries of Competence , and 9.06, Interpreting Assessment Results .)"

    Also:

    "9.03 Informed Consent in Assessments
    (a) Psychologists obtain informed consent for assessments, evaluations, or diagnostic services, as described in Standard 3.10, Informed Consent"

    This means that mental health professionals are not allowed to participate in the media diagnosis of public figures for political purposes. Failure to abide by the code of ethics can cause someone to lose their license in that state. Most states require psychologists and psychiatrists to be licensed in order to practice. Dr. Lee lost her license in CT but it is unclear whether it was due to her breaking the code of ethics or whether they use some other justification, or whether she just didn't seek renewal of her license when she was no longer actively working at Yale.

    She could have been disciplined for her book and so can any professional who goes on TV or otherwise publishes a diagnosis of Trump and his mental health issues without his consent to be examined and without a full and competent assessment upon which to base conclusions.

    Somerby has been told this repeatedly in comments but he never seems to change his statements about the role of "carefully selected" (as he puts it) mental health practitioners in telling the world that Trump is crazy (a word that mental health practitioners do not use).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mary Trump is also a licensed clinical psychologist but she walked the right side of this line that Bandy Lee crossed.

      Delete
  7. The Rot in Hell part is the worst part and Dingell did include it in her essay. I don't see why leaving out all the targets of Trump's bile changes anything about Dingell's statement. We all know who Trump's favorite targets are. Repeating his enumeration and abuse of his enemies only serves to embarrass those named and adds nothing to his deranged "ROT IN HELL" message at a time when we wish people joy and peace.

    Trump's animosity and lack of Christmas spirit are the point and Dingell conveys that well. I see no reason why Somerby should complain because she didn't list Trump's victims. Is he afraid his readers won't know who Trump is telling us to hate? Somerby's complaint about Dingell's incomplete quote makes no sense at all. And don't forget that Somerby himself has frequently been accused of doing the same thing (truncating quoted statements) in situations where the part left out DID change the author's meaning and change the slant Somerby was asserting.

    Meaning is at the heart of decisions about quoting. If your excision changes the author's intended meaning, it is wrong. Dingell's does not. Her focus was on the need to stand up to Trump, not the breadth of people Trump intentionally targeted with his ROT IN HELL message.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Concerning those posts, we'll say this:

      It has long been our assumption that the person composing those furious texts is some version of (severely) "mentally ill."

      Somerby is saying he wants the whole Trump post quoted because it support his own view that Trump is mentally ill. That wasn't Dingell's point, but Somerby himself seems to feel confident in his ability to diagnose mental illness from a rancid Christmas post (perhaps composed under the influence of a Scroogian fit of self-pity) without knowing a single thing about psychology (based on his posts here) and without any training. But Somerby has always dismissed the value of expertise, so it is unsurprising he has no hesitation about just making things up, when it is his opinion about something like mental health. Kind of like Trump does.

      Delete
    2. anon 2:50, this is a constant meme on your part that TDH "has always dismissed the value of expertise." In spite of being a highly trained expert in psychology, you don't seem to fathom that there is a difference from sometimes criticizing an alleged "expert" and "always dismissing the value of expertise." Also, you don't seem to recognize that experts from time to time, spout nonsense; and experts themselves often don't agree with each other.

      Delete
    3. Somerby has mocked the entire concept of expertise, the idea that professors or law experts, for example, or historians or Einstein biographers, might know enough to be guests on cable news with something to say about an issue in the news. I will not go look up quotes but that has been an ongoing anti-intellectual theme of Somerby's here. Of course experts can spout nonsense and disagree but I differentiate that from the idea that experts in general don't know anything worth hearing despite their years of study and research or work in a field. Next time he does it, I will point it out to you.

      Delete
    4. “I will not go look up quotes”

      OK, and I will not take your word that you’re summarizing accurately.

      Delete
    5. No one is forcing you to do anything.

      Delete
  8. I think Trump is insane. I don’t get money from any foreign source. I am Cormy.

    ReplyDelete
  9. It would seem logical to assume that Bob’s wonderful friends and neighbors who just disagree about Trump are also mentally ill. My guess would be that they are actually mean spirited, dim witted little shits. But I’ll accept Bob’s suggestion.
    To attach the usual retort to this typical nonsense, left outlets have given plenty of space to speculate on Trumps mental condition, just not spun into excuses as Bob would like.

    ReplyDelete
  10. "MAY THEY ROT IN HELL. AGAIN, MERRY CHRISTMAS!"

    The Merry Christmas seems discordant with the "May they rot in hell" portion of Trump's message until you remember that the post is aimed at his MAGA supporters and not any of the people he reviles in the message. It is Merry Christmas to his supporters and Rot in Hell to his enemies, who are not his audience.

    There is a phenomenon in psychology called "pain induced aggression". It means that a normally well-behaved dog will bite even the people trying to help it when it is injured and in pain. A rat will turn and try to bite the experimenter when it experiences a mild but painful electric shock. Trump has to be assumed to be in some pain due to his legal situation and money problems, and perhaps deteriorating relationship with Melania. Christmas may make that pain more acute. His message is clearly lashing out at his tormenters. Under his circumstances, this may be a normal reaction in Trump, someone who also throws plates at the wall when angry or frustrated. It may not be any kind of mental illness to lash out like this, but a typical response from a powerful man who is unused to being opposed and has little impulse control because he grew up doing and saying whatever he wanted. That isn't mental illness. It seems like normal behavior in an abnormal circumstance (context always matters in evaluating behavior).

    I do not mean to excuse Trump. His behavior is appalling. But one can also have some sympathy for his torment at the holidays. Somerby's belief that this is mental illness illustrates Somerby's inadequacies as a mental health professional of any kind.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are right on that score anon 3:01 [not on any others], that TDH should cease and desist his mental health professional practice. The Maryland Board that licenses psychologists should step in pronto to put a stop to this.

      Delete
    2. Their only remedy would be to pull his license if he had one. So there isn't much they can do. Someone could sue him for defamation I suppose.

      Delete
    3. AC, he is not just doing armchair diagnosis of Trump himself, but he is demanding that news outlets and journalists do the diagnosing too.

      Delete
    4. Discordant comments can be a form of humor. IMO Trump intentionally used this discordant phrase as a way to be funny. Many Trump-haters don't understand that Trump has a terrific sense of humor. It's one reason why his ad lib speeches are so popular.

      Delete
    5. Trump has zero sense of humor. Are you insane?

      Delete
    6. And I suppose it is also humor when Trump quotes Hitler then says he never read Mein Kampf. Bet Steven Miller did.

      Trump has no sense of humor. He doesn’t laugh at other people’s jokes because they aren’t talking about him — he is busy thinking about what he will say next.

      Mocking people, as he does when he imitates Biden on stage, is not funny. It is cruel bullying behavior.

      Delete
    7. @8:41 mocking people in power is a common form of humor. I can remember some wonderfully funny SNL skits mocking Presidents Nixon, Ford, and Trump. You may be too young to remember a very funny phonograph record mocking JFK and his family -- "The First Family" is a 1962 comedy album featuring comedian and impressionist Vaughn Meader. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_First_Family_(album)

      Delete
    8. Some people thought Lenny Bruce was hilarious. Others didn’t. Some people thought Andy Kaufman was hilarious. Others didn’t. Some people think Trump is hilarious. Others don’t. Go figure.

      Delete
    9. There is of course pain induced aggressiveness but it's expressing an obsessive a streak and an exhibitionist side to the public as well which feeds his obsessive desire to have power over the public.

      To the degree these are just personality quirks of having a special interest in politics, we would have liked to say Trump is a normal person, maybe with some developmental disabilities or compensations.

      But he is trying to take control of a country and as he imagines our future, all millions and millions of us, in his obsessive Nietzschan vanity, to cleanse the weak out in front of his property so he can see the beautiful mountains.

      He wants the land around him and all the people he respects, to be emptied of people, he uses the word "people pouring into the country" over and over. Consider that the spectrum of personality disorder, OCD, and some versions of autism run in clusters and these people become obsessed with cleanliness.

      This is a mental illness beyond just being tense under pressure and lashing out. It's psychopathic violence pretending to be a marketing gimmick. He's already demonstrated a willingness to attack homeless people outside his properties and did so with the presidencywhen he was allowed the reigns too writ large. He gave the American soul permission to be barbaric again like it was when it comitted the trail of tears and other advances in what he sees as white supremacist dreams and that cult of personality he can feed on.

      Delete
    10. There was a cultural competition in European society between the grandiosity of the big Patriarch, Rhodes Collosus, and the more refined, sinewy scientific professional class with their enlightenment works. It was illegal to translate things from Latin, and magic legends were things the dark people tried to use to get an upper hand, real or imagined, on the plotters who created European imperialism.

      When Trump said maybe sunlight and household cleaning agents could cure coronavirus, when he said he would make the country find its "Great again" he is conjuring this preliminary mental frame, to borrow from cognitive psychology. The jovial anti-intellect of the Big Fat Uncle Who Cares. The Grimms fairy tale who lies while telling the truth.

      If enough people really want to punish the mercurial side of their oppressors enough, the sinewy coastal cultural elite doing crosswords on the backs of stories about indentured servants in Saudi Arabia between grubhub deliveries from someone named Mohammad, they will simply be too stupid to articulate anything intelligent for the country to do about a serious issue, and set such a low bar that they elect a fool as their leader.

      These lost souls look forward like middle schoolers cussing in video games when the teacher isnt around to hateful and Nazi-esque class division of purging and vomiting out impurity.

      They fall for the usual weak mans bluff that apologizing twice for rudeness must be proof of two large leaps of boldness. Rather they're coarse for reasons of pure sensational power and clickbait.

      Delete
    11. @12:52 AM

      "Some people think Trump is hilarious. Others don’t. Go figure."

      Trump is not hilarious, but then he's not a comedian.

      Donald Trump is a populist politician, like, say, Rodrigo Duterte, or the new Argentinian guy, what's his face.

      And he talks exactly like populist politicians are supposed to talk. Well, a bit more restrained, actually, which is not a good thing for him. "Rot in hell" is kinda weak, if you ask me.

      Delete
    12. David, has it occurred to you that these examples you list are good natured satire by actual comedians? Trump is a cruel nasty vindictive asshole seeking revenge. Remember when you once claimed Trump would use his cruelty for the betterment of the country? Bwahahaha!! What the fuck is wrong with you?

      Delete
    13. A populist fraud handing huge tax breaks to his millionaire friends and taking his adoring fans for chumps.

      Delete
    14. BTW, Trump is not just a cruel nasty vindictive asshole, he is also a fucking chickenshit coward. Big brave boy when he's standing in front of his adoring rubes attacking people who can't defend themselves, David. You seem to admire that foul lack of character. What the fuck is wrong with you?

      Delete
    15. Some people want abortions, some people don't. Go figure.
      But you know us tyrannical Lefties...

      Delete
    16. BlueAnon TDS is a mental illness.

      Delete
    17. Religion is a mental illness.

      Delete
  11. This is bizarre (from Political Wire):

    "Ex-GOP Lawmaker Accused of Stealing Food Photos
    January 3, 2024 at 2:28 pm EST By Taegan Goddard

    In a bizarre micro-scandal that some have dubbed “GrubGate,” former Rep. Mayra Flores (R-TX), who is running for her old seat in South Texas, is being accused of routinely stealing photos of Mexican food from other social media accounts and passing them off as her own cooking, the Texas Tribune reports."

    ReplyDelete

  12. I concoct world salads and I smell my fingers. The world needs more word-salads and finger-sniffing, to stop horrible climate change, and to pacify Arab savages in Palestine.

    I am saving the world. I am nice. I am Corby.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Another “basic fact” is that Bandy Lee has urged the prosecution of Trump, something that Somerby never bothers to mention.

    ReplyDelete
  14. “We'll guess that Rep. Dingell also thinks that Trump is severely disordered.”

    I wouldn’t be too sure about that. She isn’t naive and ignorant of high level expertise (h/t David). She has accused trump of being hurtful and uncivil. She has never, to my knowledge, claimed that he was mentally ill or “disordered.”

    She did say this:

    “We got to treat each other with dignity and respect. Civility matters. Words have consequences.”

    And to Trump, she said “You brought me down in a way you can never imagine and your hurtful words just made my healing much harder.” (Referring to Trump’s ranting about her husband’s funeral).

    I don’t think she’s ready to extend any pity to Trump. Somerby sure does like to read people’s minds while telling others not to.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. mh, are you sure that Dingell can’t extend the pity of thinking that mental illness is a dire and wholly disqualifying factor as to the capability of leading the country?

      Is that her imperative or is it the one-track--mindedness of your silly overlords?

      Delete
    2. Cecelia, I don’t know whether you are drunk or on drugs but you aren’t making any sense and you are being nasty and inappropriately aggressive. Go sleep it off.

      Delete
    3. Anonymouse 9:17pm. and I’m utterly sure that your particular mission is itemized as to being about Somerby and his inclinations to dealing
      with the “crazy” Trump and his supporters.

      You’re that side of history, you’re the proud henchmen.



      Delete
    4. Somerby does not know what’s in Dingell’s mind, nor do you. Had she ever voiced her opinion that Trump is disordered, then we could say she thinks that. Otherwise, it’s speculation that isn’t borne out by her public utterances.

      Delete
    5. mh, but I know who and what is on the mind of you and your fellow flunkies and overlords.

      Delete
    6. I am both a flunky and an overlord.

      Delete
    7. I’m a lord and an overflunky.

      Delete
  15. It’s interesting to see Somerby trying to brand trump as a world historical basket case while David furiously tries to normalize him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They’re both wrong. I am Corpy.

      Delete
  16. DIC: "....the US military hasn't had a victory in a long time. Clearly our military policies are not producing a military as effective as it should be." There is a remarkable trend dating to roughly 2016 for right wing media outlets and their devotees to cast doubt on and criticize our military. The proper role of our military is not to engage in conflicts so that rubes like DIC can act out by flag waving and chest pounding. It is deterrence. Whether military spending is cost effective or excessive is certainly debatable. The readiness and superiority of our military is not. The fact that so many high ranking military officials have been scathingly critical of Trump is such a phenomenon that his supporters have no other options but to recognize the validity of their observations or disparage them. To their discredit, many right wingers, DIC apparently included, have chosen the latter path. Maybe we need to invade another country so that our military can gain the support of DIC, Tommy Tuberville, Tucker Carlson, and any number of chickenshit right wingers whose ideas regarding masculinity include but are not limited to the benefits of scrotal tanning.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for your response, Unamused. I wasn't thinking of whether the military support Trump. My guess is that a majority do support him, although I don't really know.

      I was thinking oft he results in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan. In all three cases, we were fighting an enemy that was poorer and worse equipped than we were, yet, we didn't win.

      Delete
    2. DiC - Believe me, I’m sympathetic - but is it true? Vietnam was a battlefield of the Cold War. We lost that battle, but won the war. Iraq and Afghanistan were battlefields in the war against al-Qaeda, another war we won. Unamused is right. Our military has protected us against existential threats.

      Delete
    3. David is correct. It's long past time to zero out the Pentagon's budget, and use the funding to directly help the poor.

      Delete
    4. George - Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan were not "battlefields". They were all wars that we lost.

      The Iraq war was a 'battle' in a war against al-Qaeda??? That is offensively ignorant and obtuse.

      Delete
    5. "We lost that battle, but won the war."

      Didn't, in fact, China win it?

      No? What is it that you - you, personally - have won, exactly? What do you have to show for it?

      Delete
    6. There weren't any Pho shops in town before the war.

      Delete
    7. What about Grenada, David? LOL!

      Delete
    8. "Iraq was a battlefield in the war against al-Qaeda".

      Please take Dick Cheney's cock out of your mouth for a few seconds and read up on that claim.

      Delete
    9. But it's such a sweet cock.

      Delete
    10. Doesn't matter how sweet it is. It's the media's job, not yours.

      Delete
    11. "Please take Dick Cheney's cock out of your mouth for a few seconds and read up on that claim."

      Please stop being a homophobic pig.

      Delete
    12. Pig - Here's what Wikipedia says about Colin Powell's presentation to the UN Security Council:

      "Powell claimed that Iraq harbored a terrorist network headed by al-Qaeda operative Abu Musab al-Zarqawi (in a small region controlled by Ansar al-Islam). He also claimed that Iraqis visited Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan and provided training to al-Qaeda members"

      In addition, the Congressional resolution authorizing the invasion did so for this reason (among others): "to end Saddam Hussein's support for terrorism."

      Delete
    13. Pig - Here's what Wikipedia says about the Global War on Terror:

      "The war on terror, officially the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT), is a global military campaign initiated by the United States following the September 11 attacks and is the most recent global conflict spanning multiple wars. The main targets of the campaign are militant Islamist movements like Al-Qaeda, Taliban and their allies. Other major targets included the Ba'athist regime in Iraq, which was deposed in an invasion in 2003"

      Delete

  17. I am so happy about one hundred new word salads I concocted yesterday!

    I smell my fingers. I am Corby.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No one worthy of the name Corby smells their own fingers.

      Delete
    2. Get lost, Boris. You are not nice.

      I am nice. I am Corby.

      Delete
    3. I’m not the first Corby, but I’m the best Corby.

      Delete
    4. You are Boris, funded by Russia via Iran and Qatar.

      I am Corby.

      Delete
    5. Funded by Iran, via Russia to remove the taint of Islam. Qatar, the site of a big US base, has nothing to do with it. I am Scorpy.

      Delete
    6. Don't be a smartass, Boris. You are funded by Russia via Iran and Qatar.

      I am Corby.

      Delete
  18. Why is Travis Kelce suddenly famous? Because his business managers, Aaron and André Eanes, do good work.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Cecelia has sunk back to David's level.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. David loves that sweet, sweet bigotry the Republican Party provides.

      Delete
    2. Anonymouse9:15am, that’s a relief.

      Delete
  20. Trump doesn't have the decency to just say Merry Chrismas or to just shut up on Christmas Day. Again, he demonstrates the type of person he is.

    ReplyDelete
  21. This blog has drifted past the point of no return. I am Korbi.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I fear you're right. I am Morbi(d).

      Delete