FRIDAY: Sean Hannity ended his show with a promise!

FRIDAY, JANUARY 31, 2025

A flyweight took over from there: Last evening, on the Fox News Channel, Sean Hannity ended his "cable news" program as he always does:

HANNITY (1/30/25): Let not your heart be troubled. Why? Greg Gutfeld is up next to put a smile on your face. Have a great night!

Just like that, the 60-year-old Gutfeld was up. After accepting applause from the studio audience, this was the first way he put that smile on our faces:

GUTFELD (1/30/25): Danish scientists have discovered a patch of 66 million-year-old vomit that is being hailed as a national treasure.

That beats us! In America, all we had was an 81-year-old piece of crap in the White House.

[LAUGHTER, APPLAUSE]

As he typically does, he opened with a short string of such jokes. 

The theme of his second joke? Joy Behar is too fat.

The theme of his third joke? The five (5) women of The View aren't sexually attractive. 

The theme of his fourth joke? Governor Pritzker (D-Ill.) is too fat.

After a Chappaquiddick joke, the mirth continued. After several jokes whose themes we couldn't quite decipher, the theme of his eighth joke was this:

CNN's Brian Stelter is too fat.

This is who, and this is what, these idiots actually are. Blue America's unimpressive elites have never come up with a way to report or discuss this societal problem.

Inevitably, he closed with a "nailing the nanny" joke. This is who these flyweights are. Also, this is the world we've enabled.

WORK SONGS: Achilles was singing his favorite songs!

FRIDAY, JANUARY 31, 2025

So was Campos-Duffy: On page A1 of today's print editions, Elisabeth Bumiller gets it right in the New York Times.

Bumiller is reporting President Trump's demented behavior at yesterday morning's press event. His madness has never been more apparent. Her news report starts as shown:

What Caused the Crash Into the Potomac? For Trump, It Was Diversity.

On the morning after a devastating midair collision of an American Airlines plane and an Army helicopter that sent 67 people, not one of whom survived, into the icy waters of the Potomac River, President Trump stood behind the White House lectern and for a brief moment did what presidents do.

He called it “a tragedy of terrible proportions.” He said “we grieve for every precious soul that has been taken from us so suddenly.” He took solace along with the nation, he said, that the journey of the 67 souls ended “in the warm embrace of a loving God.”

But then, as Navy divers continued their search for bodies in the Potomac, the president transitioned into some of the most extraordinary public statements he has ever made...

Was "transitioned" a puckish choice of words? 

We can't tell you that. But as she continued, Bumiller did a surprisingly good job reporting the madness of this Lear-adjacent king. And make no mistake:

As of this morning, the madness is general over the culture—and the madness is undisguised. It was there yesterday as the president droned insipidly on and on, but also as Kash Patel staged his astonishing, dimwitted performance before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

In fairness, the madness is general, around the clock, on the corporate messaging entity known as the Fox News Channel. As we've been noting this week, it was present last Sunday morning as Rachel Campos-Duffy sicced the hounds of hell on "Fauci," who she said is responsible for "millions of deaths."

"Fauci" has had his protection pulled by the commander. Campos-Duffy was playing with a ring of fire as she littered the countryside with an array of extremely stupid remarks, all of them in support of her attacks on the man who "deliberately" took all those lives. 

Blue America's journalistic and academic elites have never come to terms with the existence of this moral / intellectual / journalistic madness. They've never found the way to describe this moral / intellectual / journalistic disorder—this cultural madness—as it actually is.

That said, the madness is active around the clock—and this is the nighttime assault on our own sacred Troy, the nighttime assault Professor Knox described in 1990.

Professor Knox described the scene on the evening when "sacred Troy" finally fell. Our American society, vastly imperfect as it has been, is currently being sacked in a broadly similar manner.

The sheer stupidity is everywhere within this angry assault. Angry flyweights are storming the gates. So it was when the Achaeans finally broke through sacred Troy's towering walls. 

That brings us to one of our favorite scenes in literature.

Full disclosure—at this site, we aren't "well read!" But for today, let's recall the time when Achilles was singing his favorite songs, as the various employees do on the Fox News Channel.

At a time of cultural destruction, a person might seek the consolations of literature. Below, you see the favorite passage to which we refer. We'll set the scene in this manner:

After ten years of war, mighty Achilles, the fast runner, has retreated to his tents in a fit of pique.

He's been refused his choice of the young women who have been stolen from neighboring towns. And so he's now refusing to fight—and without his greatness as a "warfighter," the Achaeans will never be able to conquer sacred Troy.

(For the record, what has occasioned this braindead war? Helen ran off with Paris, the feckless son of King Priam. She has been living with Paris as his wife. The Achaeans have spent ten years dying in the dust outside Troy over this perceived insult to their gender politics.)

Achilles is sulking in his tents. Eventually, Agamemnon, lord of men dispatches Odysseus, the wily tactician, to persuade him to set his anger aside and return to the wars.

It's at that point that the scene in question occurs. The scene could have been drawn from our own current headlines.

Odysseus trembles as he approaches Achilles' tents. Upon arrival, he finds the mighty warrior singing his favorite songs.

Homer never wrote in English. This translation of the Iliad is by Professor Fagles:

Book 9: The Embassy to Achilles

[...]

So Ajax and Odysseus made their way at once 
where the battle lines of breakers crash and drag, 
praying hard to the god who moves and shakes the earth 
that they might bring the proud heart of Achilles 
round with speed and ease.
Reaching the Myrmidon shelters and their ships,
they found him there, delighting his heart now, 
plucking strong and clear on the fine lyre— 
beautifully carved, its silver bridge set firm— 
he won from the spoils when he razed Eetion's city. 
Achilles was lifting his spirits with it now, 
singing the famous deeds of fighting heroes.
Across from him Patroclus sat alone, in silence, 
waiting for Aeacus' son to finish with his song.
And on they came, with good Odysseus in the lead,
and the envoys stood before him. Achilles, startled, 
sprang to his feet, the lyre still in his hands, 
leaving the seat where he had sat in peace. 
And seeing the men, Patroclus rose up too 
as the famous runner called and waved them on: 
“Welcome! Look, dear friends have come our way—
I must be sorely needed now—my dearest friends 
in all the Achaean armies, even in my anger.”

We love various elements of that passage. Quickly, let's tick them off.

Where the breakers crash and drag: As he walks along the shore, Odysseus trembles at the thought of confronting the angry Achilles. 

In the present day, so it has gone for many people assigned to talk sense to the current deranged commander. We think, for example, of Attorney General William Barr, trying to convince the crazy sitting president that he actually did lose the 2020 election to Candidate Biden.

According to a wide range of reports, many others have suffered in the minutes and hours before they tried to talk sense to this craziest man. Also, in the long span of time in which he made them listen to his endless list of memorized grievances.

Achilles was lifting his spirits: When he arrives at Achilles' tents, Odysseus finds the mighty warrior lifting his spirits in song. 

More specifically, he's "singing the famous deeds of fighting heroes," an assignment Campos-Duffy and her corporate friends perform on a regular basis. 

Achilles is "plucking strong and clear" on a lyre he has stolen from an earlier city he overran and plundered. When you see the stupid (and dangerous) statements advanced by tribunes like Campos-Duffy, these Fox employees are also, in effect, singing their favorite songs of war.

Quite often, their songs make no earthly sense. But all the friends know the words to the songs, and they endlessly sing them together.

Across from him, Patroclus: Across from Achilles sits Patroclus, with whom he is irretrievably locked in an early bromance. The same towel-snapping occurs today when the dual flyweights, Gutfeld and Watters, break in on the imitations of discourse being staged on the Fox News Channel messaging vehicle, The Five.

Such braindead example of human bromance have never died. Suzanne Scott assembles the flyweights best equipped to perform them.

Achilles, startled, sprang to his feet: Now for the comic relief! Has anyone ever been so startled by some other person's sudden appearance that he literally "sprang to his feet?" 

We would assume that the answer is no. But there the picture sits, right there in the western world's first poem of war. It has remained a staple of Saturday morning cartoon shows from that day right up to this.

He must be sorely needed: Odysseus is widely respected within the ranks of the Achaeans. He's one of the trusted elders who intercedes when Agamemnon, lord of men suffers his recurrent emotional meltdowns, just as the commander does in the present day.

As Odysseus appears on the scene, the brooding Achilles expresses joy at the idea that he's "sorely needed." The furious warrior is finally getting some respect. 

According to many reports, this is the embassy Donald J. Trump has been waiting to receive ever since his youth in Queens, where he and father were looked down on by Manhattan's elites. He's currently performing the final act of his revenge on these elements, much as a clinically disordered person might be inclined to do.

We love the remarkably modern portrait of Odysseus trembling as he approaches Achilles' tents. We're amused by the picture of Achilles pleasuring himself with the songs which celebrate earlier violent behavior.

We especially love the language Fagle fashioned, in which "the breakers crash and drag." And remember, Achilles remains a wonderfully manly man:

This entire act of lunacy has been created by his rage—his rage at being denied the sexual services of the kidnapped young woman of his choice. So our imperfect human culture stood at the dawn of the West.

Starting Monday, we'll be examining the "madmen" (and madwomen) of the current firmament. They crawl all over the Fox News Channel. We think the time has come to say their names and to report their behavior.

Last Sunday morning, there sat Campos-Duffy—a genial presence, though only among her own. But who on earth is Campos-Duffy?

Setting aside the consolations of literature, we'll try to tell such tales.

Achilles was singing his favorite songs. Last Sunday, so was Campos-Duffy, as two flyweights looked on. 

This same thing is happening now: In 1990, Professor Knox described the nighttime assault which occasioned the fall of Troy.

The same thing is happening now. Our timid, unimpressive Blue elites haven't come close to finding a way to describe what's happening.

This was Knox's account of what happened then. The same thing is happening now:

PROFESSOR KNOX (1990): The whole poem [known as the Iliad] has been moving toward this duel between the two champions, but there has never been any doubt about the outcome...And the death of Hector seals the fate of Troy; it will fall to the Achaeans, to become the pattern for all time of the death of a city. 

The images of that night assault—the blazing palaces, the blood running in the streets, old [King] Priam butchered at the altar, Cassandra raped in the temple, Hector's baby son thrown from the battlements, his wife Andromache dragged off to slavery—all this, foreshadowed in the Iliad, will be stamped indelibly on the consciousness of the Greeks throughout their history....

Those are the things which happened back then. Our Blue elites lack the language, but the same thing is happening now.

Achilles was singing his silly war songs. That's what they do on Fox.

THURSDAY: Governor Walz was back on TV!

THURSDAY, JANUARY 30, 2025

And so was "Tampon Tim:" We couldn't help thinking of True Grit—more specifically, of the Coen Brothers' 2010 adaptation of the highly regarded Charles Portis novel.

Midway through the film, its admirable young heroine, evading the ferryman, rides Little Blackie across "a river of some width" into the Choctaw Nation—metaphorically, into an uncharted land.

At a tender age, she's gone there in pursuit of justice. This morning, the commander's astonishing press event took us across a different river and into a very strange land.

We thought back to the endless string of addled events he conducted during the first Covid year. Today, his rumination was possibly even more disordered than the string of ruminations he churned out at that time.

Then too, there was last evening's edition of the Fox News Channel's pseudo-discussion TV show, The Five. In this past month, it was the most watched TV show in "cable news," by a rather substantial margin.

We direct you to a tease by Judge Jeanine midway through last evening's program. 

Governor Walz was back in the news, having been interviewed on a CNN program. Governor Walk was back in the news—and so was "Tampon Tim." 

Judge Jeanine issued her tease. This is the garbage can the Fox News Channel pries open each night, on this and other programs

JUDGE JEANINE (1/29/25): Anyway, up next: Tampon Tim is back and giving advice to Democrats.

So announced the judge. When the gang returned from a commercial break, the silliest boy in all of cable started the segment as shown:

WATTERS: Remember Tampon Tim Walz? Kamala's jazz band's failed VP wannabe is back and handing out advice to a Democratic Party that according to the Times is getting frustrated by President Trump's "flood the zone" strategy...

Judge Jeanine is 73 years old. Within her head, Governor Walz had been back on TV, and so too for Tampon Tim.

Judge Jeanine is 73; this is all she has. Also, this is the business—perhaps more correctly, the imitation of life—the Fox News Channel has chosen.

Fox pries the lid off the can every night. The Times averts its gaze.

Fuller disclosure: Watters actually said, "Democratic Party." It might be time for Suzanne Scott to call him in for a bit of a chat, or perhaps for a mild reprogramming.

WORK SONGS: Why would they be concerned about Bobby?

THURSDAY, JANUARY 30, 2025

One worker had no idea: Yesterday afternoon, hours before the plane disaster, Robert F. Kennedy was being discussed on the cable show, Deadline: White House.

The nominee had completed a weirdly hapless performance at the first of his confirmation hearings. At 5:11 p.m., Tim Miller—he's a former Republican strategist—shared his favorite story about the person in question.

Warning! When Miller spoke about Kennedy Jr., he used some challenging words:

MILLER (1/29/25): To me, the worst of all the RFK stories is, he said himself that when he goes on hikes and he sees mothers with small children, he confronts them and tells them not to vaccinate their children. 

Like, that is the behavior of a madman—an insane person.

Say what? Has Kennedy ever said any such thing? Yesterday, in this detailed report, CNN tried to claim that he has:

RFK Jr.’s litany of controversial views to come under scrutiny in Senate confirmation hearing

[...]

NBC News senior reporter Brandy Zadrozny noted Thursday that when Kennedy was asked on the “Health Freedom for Humanity” podcast in 2021 how parents should respond to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention schedule of immunizations for children, which his questioner described as “insane,” he responded by encouraging people to join him in telling strangers not to vaccinate their babies.

“For many, many years, I think parents were so gaslighted, and they were scapegoated, and they were vilified and marginalized, so that even parents of kids who were very, very badly injured, knew what happened to their kid, but they were just reluctant to talk about it. And I think now those days are over,” Kennedy said.

“We—our job is to resist and to talk about it to everybody. If you’re walking down the street—and I do this now myself, which is, you know, I don’t want to do—I’m not a busybody. I see somebody on a hiking trail carrying a little baby and I say to him, ‘Better not get him vaccinated.’ And he heard that from me. If he hears it from 10 other people, maybe he won’t do it, you know, maybe he will save that child.”

Kennedy repeated later in the podcast: “If you’re one of 10 people that goes up to a guy, a man or a woman, who’s carrying a baby, and says, ‘Don’t vaccinate that baby,’ when they hear that from 10 people, it’ll make an impression on ‘em, you know. And we all kept our mouth shut. Don’t keep your mouth shut anymore. Confront everybody on it.”

So claimed CNN. Meanwhile, you can see the nominee say that yourself, simply by clicking here

(For the record, Kennedy Jr. isn't a busybody. He's just someone who says things like that to young parents he doesn't know when he sees them on hiking trails.)

Also this:

For whatever reason, for better or worse, Kennedy Jr. has said a million such things in the past. (Until such time as he starts insisting that he actually hasn't!)

Some rather tough language is on display in the statements we've posted above—first in the Health Freedom for Humanity podcast, then on Deadline: White House. As a courtesy, we'll assume that Miller may have bene speaking colloquially when he said that the behavior he described was the behavior of "a madman"—of someone who is "insane."

For the record, our own assessment would pretty much have to be this:

Speaking on a non-clinical basis, Kennedy Jr. has possibly seemed to be severely disordered during the full extent on his life.

In his defense, we'd point to the trauma which may imaginably result from seeing your uncle shot and killed on national TV when you're ten years old, followed by the experience of seeing your father shot and killed, in a similar way, less than five years later.

Can such experiences possibly leave a young person (colloquially) "insane" or "disordered?" 

Not being medical specialists, we don't know how to answer that question. But Kennedy's routinely bizarre life history almost seems to speak for itself. That includes his bizarre sexual conduct, which "legacy media," for whatever reason, have generally agreed not to report, discuss, explore or assess. 

Two days ago, his cousin Caroline took us out beyond that. She spoke about the chickens and mice. She spoke about the drug dealing.

At any rate, there was Miller, citing one of the three million unusual past behaviors by the nominee. These odd behaviors are quite well known—unless you're watching someone like Rachel Campos-Duffy on an imitation of life like the Fox News Channel.

Last Sunday morning, there she sat, making remarks about "Fauci" which strike us as almost insanely irresponsible. 

Did she have the first freaking clue what she was talking about? If she'd been challenged by a knowledgeable interlocutor, could she have defended her remarkable statements—including her amazingly stupid claim to instant certainty, right from the jump, about the alleged lab leak? 

We'll guess that she quite likely couldn't have done that. That said, there's no earthly chance that she'll ever be so challenged on Fox & Friends Weekend, where she has labored, for almost four years, as one of the show's co-hosts.

Last Sunday morning, she sat in her standard position on the tuffet, accompanied by two of her friends. As we noted on Tuesday, a call of the roll reveals this:

Fox & Friends Weekend, 1/26/25
Rachel Campos-Duffy: co-host, Fox & Friends Weekend
Charlie Hurt: new co-host, Fox & Friends Weekend
Jason Chaffetz: former congressman (R-Utah); Fox News contributor

So sat the Fox News Channel Work Song Gang—that day's Stepford Singers. As they sang their tribal war songs, Campos-Duffy—she of the genial demeanor among her own—was even willing to say something as blindingly stupid as this:

CAMPOS-DUFFY (1/26/25): It's interesting because you have Tulsi Gabbard and Bobby Kennedy, who are also Democrats.

HURT: Exactly.

CAMPOS-DUFFY: So what do they do with that, and what exactly is it that they don't like about these guys? In the case of Bobby, they don't like that he's against Big Pharma and big corporations. 

And Tulsi Gabbard—you know, she's someone who's willing to give peace a chance. I guess that's not a Democrat [sic] value any more.

So sang the multimillionaire "cable news" field hand. 

She didn't have the slightest idea what they didn't like about "Bobby!" As early as 6:06 on a Sunday morning, this is the pablum Red America is fed by "work song gangs" of this type.

Is Robert Kennedy Jr. "insane?" Miller may have been speaking colloquially, though then again possibly not.

In Campos-Duffy herself disordered in some major way? Or is she simply a true believer? Is it possible that she simply does what she does for the cash?

We can't answer those obvious questions. 

Next week, as we return to our MADNESS theme, we'll be sharing more of Campos-Duffy's biography. But make no mistake:

Even now, as we type today, our failing nation has long since crossed the border into the realm of the madness. 

At any rate, there you saw the kind of "sifting" these work song gangs provide. Viewers of programs like Fox & Friends Weekend will never be exposed to the full range of facts about the great men and women the God-chosen commander has nominated for service here on this earth. 

(Also, such viewers will never be exposed to the full range of facts about anything else! That's how the sifting works.)

As for the commander himself, he was saved by Campos-Duffy's "lord and savior, Jesus Christ." Along with two other friends (one of whom was Pete Hegseth), she finally copped to that sectarian assessment on the Sunday morning after the assassination attempt in Butler.

(Stating the obvious, she's fully entitled to her view. Within the norms of American journalism, it's a slightly unusual framework.)

Who or what is Campos-Duffy? In the simplest formulation, she's a highly genial presence (among her own) who's willing to put "Fauci's" life at risk. Also, who says she doesn't have the slightest idea why anyone would have reservations about the wonderful "Bobby."

She can't imagine why that would be! She has no earthly idea!

For the record, Tulsi" isn't a Democrat; she left the party in 2022, which was her perfect right. But last Sunday, the field hand was singing one of her (many) favorite work songs—and as she did, she reminded us of one of our favorite scenes from all of literature

Full disclosure—we aren't "well read." But we'll share that scene tomorrow.

Tomorrow: Democratization and madness

WEDNESDAY: What did he say and when did he say it?

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 29, 2025

He "probably did say that!" What did Robert F. Kennedy Jr. say and when did Robrt F. Kennedy Jr. perhaps or possibly say it?

Senator Bennet (D-Col.) was trying to find out! At Mediaite, David Gilmour provides the videotape, and he's done some transcription.

What did Kennedy Jr. say? In fairness, a simpler question might be this—what hasn't the gentleman said? Below, you see the first Q-and-A as Bennet and Kennedy chatted:

BENNET (1/29/25): Did you say that Covid-19 was a genetically engineered bioweapon that targets Black and white people, but spared Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese people?

KENNEDY: I didn’t say it was deliberately targeted. I just, I just quoted an NIH funded, an NIH published study—

BENNET: Did you say that it targets Black and white people, but spared Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese people?

KENNEDY: I quoted a study, your honor. I quoted an NIH study that showed that—

BENNET: I’ll take that as a yes. I have to move on, Mr. Kennedy. 

He didn't say it was deliberately targeted! As he tried to explain, or perhaps as he pretended to do so, Senator Bennet—who was now being addressed as "Your Honor"—declared that he had to move on.

So it goes in congressional hearing, Senate and House, thanks to the way the questioning is conducted:

Each solon is given a short chunk of time in which he can pose his questions. This creates a strong incentive against letting the witness speak. Also, witnesses may sometimes tend to try to kill time, knowing the solon's time will soon come to an end. 

That said, did Kennedy make the statement in question? Based on that truncated exchange, we'd say it may be a bit hard to tell.

So it goes with congressional hearings. That said, when Kennedy Jr. is the witness, it may end up going like this:

BENNET (continuing directly): Did you say that Lyme disease is highly likely a materially engineered bioweapon? 

I made sure I put in the "highly likely." Did you say Lyme disease is a "highly likely militarily engineered bioweapon?"

KENNEDY: I probably did say that...

"I probably did say that!" So said this particular witness, in one of the all-time, comically bad, congressional hearing answers.

Senator Bennet interrupted Kennedy again, then continued along. These were the next two exchanges:

BENNET: Did you say that exposure to pesticides causes children to become transgender?

KENNEDY: No, I never said that.

BENNET: Okay, I have the record that I’ll give to the chairman, and he can make his judgment about what you said. 

Did you write in your book it’s undeniable that African AIDS is an entirely different disease from western AIDS. Yes or no, Mr. Kennedy?

KENNEDY: I’m not sure if I made that—

BENNET: Okay. I’ll give it to the chairman. Mr. Kennedy.  And my final question...

Kennedy said he hadn't said the one thing. He didn't seem sure, once again, about the other comment. He didn't seem sure once again—though once again, he was cut off.

This isn't a great way conduct such hearings. That said, rational procedures have long since ceased to exist here on these dying shores.

WORK SONGS: Was the vaccine "good for us?"

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 29, 2025

At Fox, that claim was a "lie:" On it came, right there last Saturday night, right on the Fox News Channel. 

On came the TV show called The Big Weekend Show. The program comes close to being the dumbest of the channel's weekend fare. 

Four field workers were sent to the set. Soon, the field hands were swinging their hammers and singing their channel's work songs.

Panelists, The Big Weekend Show, 1/25/25
Brian Benberg:  Co-host, The Big Money Show. Childhood friend of Pete Hegseth
Molly Line: Rotating host, Fox News Live
Lisa Boothe: Fox News Channel contributor
Gianno Caldwell: "Political analyst," Fox News Channel

Near the end of the hour, it was Lisa Boothe's turn to sing. 

With one voice, the workers were praising the commander's decision to release the last few classified files concerning three major assassinations. As they praised the greatness of his decision, these chyrons appeared on the screen

"EVERYTHING WILL BE REVEALED"
TRUMP DECLASSIFIES JFK, RFK, MLK JR ASSASSINATION FILES

At long last, we the people were going to be fully informed!

The panelists were in agreement about the greatness of the decision. Unanimity of viewpoint is the basic organizational principle behind this imitation of life.

The Stepford Singers were duly impressed. Then, Boothe offered this:

BOOTHE (1/25/25): Well, isn't it ironic that the guy who was labeled a threat to democracy will be the one who restores faith and confidence in government through some of these actions as well? This is what we need. We need transparency...

I fully support what he's doing here, and especially after being lied to tremendously throughout Covid. I think these actions will help restore faith in government. And so good for President Trump!

Say what? We the people were "lied to tremendously" all through Covid? So the Fox News contributor said. As you can see if you watch the full tape, the other hands quickly fell in line, singing the same corporate song.

We could be wrong, but it's our impression that Boothe has toughened her pundit stance within the past (highly partisan) year. Sometimes, Suzanne Scott may perhaps direct the hands to do that. 

At some point, we'll show you what the New York Times once meekly reported concerning Scott's session with Greg Gutfeld. At the time, he was still a critic of Donald J. Trump, whom he quickly came to adore. 

At any rate, the Big Weekend discussion continued along from there. Caldwell lavished praise on Boothe for the courage she has shown in daring to discuss the Covid lie. Boothe was soon saying this:

BRENBERG: There was a time in America where, I think there was a high level of trust in our institutions. And we said, maybe for security reasons some things ought to stay where they are.

We don't live in that moment right now.

BOOTHE: Because we realize, when the government told us that, it was a lie. It was about protecting the government, not about protecting the American people.

So I think the jig is up. People are onto it. They know it's a lie, just like with Covid. 

"Go get the shotit will be good for you." No, it wasn't!....

And then we look at it, and what was it all for? It was to protect Dr. Fauci's own culpability and the gain-of-function that he was funding at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. 

There's more to see as the hands sing this song. But there the lyric was again:

It was a lie when we were told that the Covid vaccine was good for us. It was a lie designed to protect Dr. Fauci.

To her credit, Boothe still uses the honorific when she sings this corporate song of war. She's still willing to call him Dr. Fauci, even as she spreads an astonishing claim about the Covid vaccine, and about the motive behind the "lie" about the vaccine's value.

In a different setting, under challenge, do you believe that the likable Boothe could defend her startling claims? Do you think she could capably defend her claims in the face of a dissenter or sceptic?

For ourselves, we'd make no such assumption. But on the Fox News Channel, on a Saturday night, the driving beat goes on.

Thanks to the work of the angry commander, Dr. Fauci's security detail has now been withdrawn. That's been done even as field hands like Boothe step forward singing this song. And please understand this key point:

Everyone else will agree with such claims when they're made on a program like this. 

Fox News has assembled a cast of thousands (of Stepfords), each of whom can be trusted to sing the corporation's mandated songs. In even a slightly rational realm, this practice would raise an obvious question:

Question! What's the point of assembling a four-person panel if all four of the workers are going to say the same things? 

Answer! The otherwise peculiar practice creates an imitation of life! In this case, it created the illusion that a group discussion was taking place. Needless to say, the children who form this misleading chorale are all being paid for their service. 

Does democracy possibly die in the dumbness? Over on the Fox News Channel, a long list of hands like Brenberg and Boothe are putting that claim to the test. 

With that claim in mind, let's get clear on what Boothe (and the others) said:

They said the Covid vaccine wasn't "good for" the people who received it.  They said it had been a "lie" when public officials said different. 

In fact, we the people "lied to tremendously," the four workers said. They said the officials had told this lie to cover up for (Dr.) Fauci. 

Twelve hours later, a clown car staffing Fox & Friends Weekend arrived at the Fox News Channel set.

A genial presence emerged from the car. As we noted on Monday, she smilingly told Red America that "Fauci" was deliberately "responsible for millions of deaths."

None of the other weekend friends challenged or questioned her statement. Not unlike the famous Homey, these field hands don't play it that way.

Tomorrow, we'll return to the set of Fox & Friends Weekend. With Dr. Fauci, but also with General Milley, the commander is taking protections away, and the workers are happily singing these dangerous songs.

Final point:

None of this will be discussed at Blue America's favorite spas. Relentlessly, we self-impressed but compliant Blues have labored to earn our way out.

Also tomorrow: Back to the WHO


TUESDAY: He also clattered about a "valve!"

TUESDAY, JANUARY 28, 2025

King Lear saves Cali again: He makes so many odd remarks that they tend to be quickly forgotten. 

In this morning's report about the commander, we forgot to cite the news report, from last Friday's Washington Post, about the shape of (California's) water.

There the commander went again! Headline included, the Post's report started as shown:

Trump says a ‘valve’ can solve California’s water woes. Experts say it’s not true.

It’s one of California’s thorniest problems. The nation’s most populous state is full of sprawling cities, vast farmland, rich ecosystems—and it must decide how to divide scarce water resources among them.

But for President Donald Trump, the solution is simple: Turn a valve and more water will flow.

“Los Angeles has massive amounts of water available to it,” Trump said at a news conference Tuesday. “All they have to do is turn the valve.”

As Trump prepares to visit wildfire-ravaged Los Angeles on Friday, he has offered different theories for how Southern California could get more water to fight fires. He is blaming a minnow-size fish, claiming that water can be diverted from Canada, and suggesting that a single valve could be turned to solve the state’s water woes.

Trump said during a Fox News interview on Wednesday that California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) “can release the water that comes from the north.” 

Exactly one week ago, that's what the commander said.

Forget about turning a "very large faucet," his recommendation from early September, when he was still just a hopeful. This time, the commander said the Golden State should simply "turn the valve!"

It sounded like a great idea—a simple solution to an alleged problem. To appearances, the brilliant commander had done it again—but the report continued directly as shown:

“There is massive amounts of water, rainwater and mountain water that comes through with the snow, comes down as it melts. There’s so much water they’re releasing it into the Pacific Ocean,” Trump said.

But experts say solving the drought-stricken state’s water scarcity isn’t so simple.

“The president is injecting himself into a difficult, complex situation that people have been working on for” years, said Tom Holyoke, a Western water politics expert at California State University at Fresno.

“There is no ‘valve,’” he added.

So it goes with these experts today!  Indeed, it's as we noted this morning:

Back in September, one expert had said that there's no such thing as a "very large faucet" which could release water from Neptune (or from some comparable locale). Now, the Post had found another expert—and this joker was trying to say that there is no magical valve! 

Citizens, can we talk? 

Starting with Caligula and his Senate-ready horse, history, legend and literature have gifted us with a succession of addled rulers of this familiar type:

There was Caligula and his steed. There was Lear, who refused to listen to the one daughter who was trying to tell him the truth.

Even on the plains outside Troy, Agamemnon, lord of men was persistently melting down at various moments of truth. Routinely, he was rescued from his lunatic conduct by the intercessions of such seasoned elders as Nestor, king of Pylos' sandy harbor, and Odysseus, the wily tactician.

Are we former Americans now in thrall to the madness of our own King George? We asked that question two weeks ago—and according to the Post's report, there's no such thing as that valve!

Tomorrow: In search of that $500 million


WORK SONGS: Rev. Davis was washed in the blood of the lamb!

TUESDAY, JANUARY 28, 2025

Campos-Duffy keeps playing with fire: The workers were swinging their nine-pound hammers quite early this past Sunday morning.

Their work songs help make the hours pass as they perform their labors. Some are paid millions of dollars per year for the eight hours of labor, per week, they provide for The Man:

Fox News Channel Work Song Gang, 1/26/25
Rachel Campos-Duffy: co-host, Fox & Friends Weekend
Charlie Hurt: new co-host, Fox & Friends Weekend
Jason Chaffetz: former congressman (R-Utah); Fox News contributor

This past Sunday, at 6 a.m., all three seemed highly convicted. As field work goes, the pay is quite good. It's the blinding stupidity which makes this "cable news" program such a compelling watch.

The workers agree that they'll all sing the songs handed down by the bosses. No prescribed lyric will be left behind. 

Starting at 6:04 a.m.—on a Sunday morning, no less!—this giant clown call was heard:

CAMPOS-DUFFY (1/26/25): Pete Hegseth, congratulations! He's out. And some of the senators who didn't vote for him voted for Rachel Levine. 

It's just kind of incredible if you really think about it. If you remember Rachel Levine from HHS. Thinks—he thinks she's a woman. He thinks he's a woman, I guess.

CHAFFETZ: Yeah! They voted for Fauci! They voted for a lot of these people, and then— Their support is just mystifying to me, because I think they made a great case. 

Also John Ratcliffe, excited to have him as the CIA director. He's out and in that position and then immediately releases a report that I found fascinating and I know we're going to talk about a little bit later.

CAMPOS-DUFFY: Yeah! I guess it did— It did come out of the lab!

CHAFFETZ: Yeah! And the CIA—that was the CIA under Biden. That's what they came up with!

CAMPOS-DUFFY: I didn't even—I didn't need to be in the CIA to know that one! [Laughs]

HURT: Exactly. They have a firm grasp of the obvious.

CAMPOS-DUFFY: Yeah. [Laughs]

HURT: This is a great CIA we have here. But it is kind of interesting...

And so on from there. You'll have to look up Dr. Levine for yourself. She's a recurrent figure of ridicule among field hands of this type.

To watch that performance, you can just click here. Let's set the scene a bit further:

Hurt may be the dumbest mofo in the whole Fox News Channel stable. Campos-Duffy is extremely genial, even at 6 o'clock on a Sunday morning, just so long as she's with her own.

You can see the claptrap, and hear the delighted laughter, just by clicking that link. The claptrap continued all morning. 

The program runs for four hours. It's the sheer stupidity of this "cable news" show which makes it such a compelling watch. 

Question: Were there confirmation votes for Dr. Fauci at any stage in his long career? 

We don't know the answer to that. We do know what the workers were talking about with respect to that new CIA report.

Singing one of her usual songs, Campos-Duffy said she'd known it all along! That said, the CIA itself doesn't claim to know what's true about the origin on Covid-19. Politico headline included, here's what the new report said:

CIA now says Covid-19 is more likely to have originated from a lab leak

The Central Intelligence Agency said Saturday that it’s more likely a lab leak caused the Covid-19 pandemic than an infected animal that spread the virus to people, changing the agency’s yearslong stance that it couldn’t conclude with certainty where the pandemic started.

The agency made its new assessment public two days after former Republican lawmaker John Ratcliffe was sworn in as its new leader.

“We have low confidence in this judgement and will continue to evaluate any available credible new intelligence reporting or open-source information that could change CIA’s assessment,” an unnamed CIA spokesperson wrote in an email sent to reporters Saturday.

The statement didn’t include any additional details about what led the agency to change its assessment and whether it had intelligence that would add weight to the theory that the virus had leaked from a research lab in Wuhan, China.

The “CIA continues to assess that both research-related and natural origin scenarios of the Covid-19 pandemic remain plausible,” the statement said.

Even now, the CIA's new assessment is being offered with "low confidence." Each scenario "remains plausible," the CIA now says.

The CIA was giving voice to "low confidence." But at the clown show staged by the Fox News Channel, the confidence of one multimillionaire worker was quite high. 

The wealthy field worker was swinging her axe as directed by the people who own her. As we noted yesterday, this clown car performer was soon singing such lyrics as these:

CAMPOS-DUFFY: ...Red flag? Hello! And also, the Wuhan lab was doing Covid and coronavirus studies. Like, duh? 

"I'm not in the CIA—and I knew this right way!" this undisguised circus clown said. The CIA still doesn't know—but this millionaire field hand does!

Campos-Duffy is full of true belief. She knows the words to all the songs she and her co-workers sing.

Also, as she has revealed on this program, she truly believes in "our lord and savior, Jesus Christ." (As do more than two billion other people, all around the world.)

There's nothing "wrong" with that widely held belief. But this particular believer also he also tends to play with rings of fire. 

As we noted yesterday, she likes to tell every crackpot in the nation that "Fauci," as she prefers to call him—no first name, no honorific—is directly responsible for millions of deaths.

It's much as we told you on Sunday. The late Reverend Gary Davis was happy to say that his soul had been "washed in the blood of the lamb." 

As the leading authority notes, the Rev. Davis was born "black," in rural South Carolina, in the year 1896. Given the world he was forced to negotiate, we ourselves are glad to know that he came to have the experience he describes in this stunningly compelling performance, as Pete Seeger and the very young Donovan are seen looking on.

That said, Campos-Duffy often seems eager to see "Fauci" washed in a different volume of blood. It's astounding that a person of such amazingly bad judgment is being paid millions of dollars to swing this hammer in this way on a major "cable news" program. 

It's even more astounding that, as this clown car keeps rolling along, every major news org in Blue America has agreed to avert its gaze from what is happening there.

The clown car just kept rolling on all through Sunday's four hours. We'll return to that car wreck tomorrow.

For today, we'll take you to the latest post by Kevin Drum. His post concerns the latest tweet from the sitting commander. The tweet appeared late last night:

Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump

The United States Military just entered the Great State of California and, under Emergency Powers, TURNED ON THE WATER flowing abundantly from the Pacific Northwest, and beyond. The days of putting a Fake Environmental argument, over the PEOPLE, are OVER. Enjoy the water, California!!!

So the (possible) madman tweeted. As you can see by clicking this link, this was Kevin's reaction, headline included:

Donald Trump: I ordered military to turn on the water in California

What in God's name is Trump talking about here?

[Text of last night's tweet]

This is beyond weird. It's hallucinatory. And even if it were somehow true that the Army TURNED ON THE WATER, California doesn't get any water from the Pacific Northwest or beyond. We get it from our very own Sierra Nevadas.

Is Trump really and truly losing it? Or does he figure he can just say anything he wants for the rubes? Or what?

So says Kevin (more below). With respect to ourselves, full disclosure:

Way back in early September, we tried to fact-check this topic. At that time, Candidate Trump had spoken in a panoramic oceanfront setting in Rancho Palos Verdes (southern Los Angeles County). 

At that time, he spoke about turning "a very large faucet" somewhere to turn all the water loose.

At that time, major news orgs let the statement go. They do that with many of the strange remarks made by this strange person. 

After wasting a lot of time, we couldn't get clear enough on the actual facts to bring his matter to your attention. But the puzzling statements have continued, with the "massive faucet" Trump wanted to turn sometimes described as a wheel.

Back in September, a CBS affiliate in Oregon eventually published a fact check concerning that very large faucet. Accurately or otherwise, here's how that fact check started:

Expert: Trump’s ‘large faucet’ that can divert water from PNW to LA doesn’t exist

PORTLAND, Ore. (KOIN) — If it were up to former President Donald Trump, Los Angeles would enjoy “more water than you ever saw” by diverting water from the Columbia River to Southern California, he suggested.

Trump told reporters between campaign fundraisers in Rancho Palos Verdes, Calif. on Sept. 13 that, if elected, he would turn on “a very large faucet,” that he claims could send millions of gallons of water from the Pacific Northwest to Los Angeles.

“You have millions of gallons of water pouring down from the north, with the snow caps and Canada, and all pouring down,” Trump said in the press conference just after an hour into it. “And they have, essentially, a very large faucet, and you turn the faucet, and it takes one day to turn, and it’s massive … and you turn that, and all of that water goes aimlessly into the Pacific. And if you turned it back, all of that water would come right down here and right into Los Angeles.”

One of the potential problems with the Republican presidential nominee’s plan is that his system for channeling that water from the Pacific Northwest to Southern California doesn’t exist, Oregon’s state Climatologist Larry O’Neill told KOIN 6 News.

“There is indeed no such diversion system and none has been seriously proposed that I am aware of,” O’Neill said.

You can read the rest of the fact-check yourself. Last night, the faucet seemed to be back in action. Indeed, the U.S. army had turned it!

Did the commander's tweet make sense? Right there in SoCal, Drum's answer seems to be no. He seemed to say he has no idea what this nutcase is talking about.

For ourselves, we'd moved ahead to a fact check of the commander's repeated remarks about the way the United States has been ripped off by the World Health Organization:

Here's the way a recent report at the Fox News site described that allegation, dual headline included:

Trump open to considering re-entry into World Health Organization: 'They'd have to clean it up'
'We paid $500 million a year and China paid $39 million a year,' Trump told rally goers Saturday

During a rally at Circa Resort & Casino in Downtown Las Vegas, the president told those in attendance that it was unfair a country like China, with a population much greater than the U.S., was only paying a fraction of what the U.S. was paying annually to the WHO.

"We paid $500 million a year and China paid $39 million a year despite a much larger population. Think of that. China's paying $39 million to have 1.4 billion people, we pay $500 million we have—no one knows what the hell we have, does anyone know? We have so many people pouring in we have no idea," Trump told rally goers on Saturday.

"They offered me at $39 million, they said 'We'll let you back in for $39 million,' they're going to reduce it from [$500 million] to [$39 million], and I turned them down, because it became so popular I didn't know if it would be well received even at [$39 million], but maybe we would consider doing it again, I don’t know, they have to clean it up a bit."

An analysis of national contributions to the WHO from NPR found that the U.S. pays for roughly 10% of the WHO's budget, while China pays about 3%.

And so on from there. This report quoted the commander's repeated claim about the (alleged) $500 million from the United States, as compared to the (alleged) $39 million from China. 

It also cited an NPR fact-check. Tomorrow, we'll visit that astoundingly bungled attempt at a fact-check.

This is the shape of the broken world with which we the people are left. Tomorrow, we'll return to the silly work songs a clown like Campos-Duffy sings for eight hours every weekend, in unison with other hands.

The Reverend Davis said his soul had been washed in the blood of the lamb. Campos-Duffy almost seems to want to see "Fauci" washed in the blood of himself.

Two weeks ago, we asked a basic question. Quoting something the commander had said, we asked this:

In what world wouldn't a comment like that be viewed as the work of a madman?

Major Blue orgs are still ducking that question. Yesterday, the commander directed the army to turn the "very large faucet." Tomorrow, we'll visit what he keeps saying about the WHO.

 On Fox & Friends Weekend, the tired field hands—self-assured workers like Campos-Duffy—make it clear that they know the words to all of Ole Massa's songs. 

When it comes to the origin of Covid-19, the CIA still isn't sure. This one particular TV hand has been quite sure all along!

With respect to "Fauci," she insists on playing with rings of fire. Devoted to her lord and savior, she's been playing that very dangerous tune for a very long time now.

Tomorrow: Mote topics from Sunday's clown show


MONDAY: Gail Collins went to the Dylan film!

MONDAY, JANUARY 27, 2025

Bret Stephens on DEI: Gail Collins says she went to the Dylan film—but in her new Conversation with Bret Stephens, she doesn't say whether she liked it.

Stephens says he's planning to see the film. But in his new Conversation with Collins, he spends a substantial chunk of time saying what he doesn't like about the Trump White House sequel so far.

What doesn't Stephens like? "The list is so long," he says. Then he provides this list:

Trump Explodes Out of the Gate

[...]

Bret: The Jan. 6 pardons were awful. So was the pardon of Ross Ulbricht, the founder of an online drug market. Withdrawing Secret Service protections for Mike Pompeo and John Bolton and other former members of his administration is disgraceful and will haunt him if Iran makes good on its efforts to kill them. The sale of Trump crypto tokens is tawdry and unethical, at best, though very much on brand for the purveyor of Trump Steaks.

Gail: Love that one.

Bret: The effort to revoke birthright citizenship and overturn 160 years of jurisprudence on the 14th Amendment is abominable, though I was glad to see a Reagan-appointed federal judge immediately denounce the move as “blatantly unconstitutional” and temporarily block it. Looking forward to the Supreme Court following the judge’s lead, 9 to 0.

Gail: Yes! Yes!

Bret: We should not have Hegseth as defense secretary; in fact, we should never have a defense secretary who can’t get a single member of the opposing party to vote for him. And the idea that Elon Musk has an office in the White House when he has billions of dollars of business before the federal government is appalling.

I’m probably forgetting something, but yeah, there’s a lot not to like. And yet—

Gail: Oh, no, don’t “and yet” me.

For Stephens, a man of the center right, the list goes on and on. 

Awful? Disgraceful? Tawdry? Unethical? Abominable and appalling? 

Stephens, a man of the center right, finds a great deal not to like! And yet, by that time he assembles that list, he has already said this:

Bret: Any thoughts on Trump’s orders ending D.E.I. programming in the federal government?

Gail: The idea that government agencies should try to stress diversity, equity and inclusion in hiring decisions was heir to the historic fight for desegregation in civil service. Reformers argued that Americans of all races tended to do well if they came from middle-class families with ties to their communities and that the next step should be programs to open up educational and employment opportunities for everybody else.

Seems very appropriate that the administration pushing back is one that tends to regard political loyalty as the most important criterion for almost any job.

Bret: The central problem with D.E.I. is neither diversity nor inclusion. It’s the word “equity,” which in theory ought to mean simple fairness but in practice meant pervasive racial and gender gerrymandering based almost exclusively—and unconstitutionally—on considerations of group identity rather than individual qualifications. It also led to the creation of D.E.I. bureaucracies in thousands of institutions, from universities to corporations, whose employees too often acted as Soviet-style political commissars, enforcing all kinds of intrusive orthodoxies that tried to dictate not only how other employees or students were supposed to act but also how they were supposed to think and speak.

Anyone who has sat through a D.E.I. training seminar—by turns saccharine and scolding, treacly and tendentious—knows what I mean. It just turned people off, including a lot of well-meaning people who are all for inclusivity as a value. Trump getting rid of it is the best thing he’s done in office so far, as far as I’m concerned.

At this site, we've never "sat through a D.E.I. training seminar." But we've read the books and we've scanned the brochures. On that basis, we feel fairly sure that we know what Stephens is talking about.

In that exchange, Collins offers the lofty ideas behind the fundamental concept of "DEI." Stephens moves in a different direction. In effect, he's saying something like this:

There's no such thing as a good intention which can't be unwisely pursued.

For ourselves, we wouldn't know how to evaluate an order as sweeping as the one Trump has issued. How many good programs are possibly being thrown away, along with some which may resemble the portrait Stephens offers?

That said, we'll take a guess:

Blue America almost surely lost quite a few votes thanks to some of the dumber applications of this theoretically good idea. Simply put, we Blues aren't anywhere near as smart as we persistently claim to be. We've proven this again and again with respect to these topics, and we continue to do so.

Before the week is done, we'll offer a brand-new example. Every time some of this unhelpful folderol hits the fan, a Trump voter gets his wings.

WORK SONGS: The Fox News Channel Work Song Group!

MONDAY, JANUARY 27, 2025

Campos-Duffy, playing with fire: Rachel Campos-Duffy is part of the Fox News Channel Work Song Group.

Ever since May 2021, Campos-Duffy has been a lead singer on the newly reorganized TV program, Fox & Friends Weekend. In recent works, vast change has come to the program's set.

In recent weeks, Fox & Friends Weekend lost co-host Pete Hegseth to a role in government service. It saw co-host Will Cain take over the Fox News Channel's recently abandoned 4 p.m. weekday spot.

(At 4 p.m., Neal Cavuto is OUT and Cain is IN. That will change this 4 p.m. weekday hour from news to mandated "opinion.")

At any rate, of the previous three co-hosts, Campos-Duffy alone remains. On Saturday morning, bright and early, she was singing a favorite song. 

She was making one thing very clear:

Campos-Duffy doesn't care a whole lot for a certain killer of millions.

In fairness, everyone at the Fox News Channel knows the words to this particular work song. Yesterday, at 7:14 a.m., sounds of John Henry's hammer seemed to ring out as Campos-Duffy sang one of the channel's group songs.

As she started, her song concerned a recent (fairly minor) change of assessment within the CIA. We'll offer more detail tomorrow. As you can see by clicking here, this is part of what Campos-Duffy said:

CAMPOS-DUFFY (1/26/25): ...Red flag? Hello! And also, the Wuhan lab was doing Covid and coronavirus studies. Like, duh? 

CHARLIE HURT: [Chuckles appreciatively]

CAMPOS-DUFFY: And this was all deliberately, you know, hidden by Fauci. And this is what concerns me, you guys. 

It's not just the lack of transparency—it's the lack of accountability. The fact that Fauci got a pardon, and he will never have to bear responsibility, at least from a federal level.

[Turning to former Rep. Jason Chaffetz]

When I talked to you, you said he could still face state charges. But this man did a huge disservice—responsible for hundreds, millions of deaths—and he will still not be held responsible. That's a problem.

("I'm not in the CIA! And I knew this right way!" the all-knowing cable host said, with respect to the relatively minor change in the CIA's assessment.)

At any rate, so the cable star said, early on Sunday morning:

[Dr.] Fauci is responsible for millions of deaths—but he will never be held responsible for what he has done, at least not on the federal level.

At this point, Campos-Duffy was continuing a diatribe about "Fauci"—a diatribe she'd started early in the 6 o'clock hour, with accusations that seemed perhaps a bit more intense than the one we're recording here.

As the week proceeds, we're going to show you more of what Campos-Duffy said this Sunday morning. She was singing the old Fox News Channel songs—the songs the various members of the Work Song Group sing out, for all to hear, on a 24-hour basis.

Already, by 7:15, Campos-Duffy had sung the songs about the Wuhan lab leak which "Fauci" deliberately hid. She had sung the familiar old song about Dr. Rachel Levine, who thinks that she's a woman.

She had sung the songs about Tulsi and Bobby, saying that she doesn't know what the objections to these nominees are. She had sung the song about the fact that we don't need more IRS agents.

Also, the song about the way the IRS "has guns!" ("I never knew that before," the Fox News chanteuse said.) She had already sung a couple of songs about the Panama Canal. She had told Fox News Channel viewers about the "cesspool in the FBI."

Forgive us for saying this, but we'll admit that we wondered, at various points, if Campos-Duffy had any real idea what she was talking about. 

She did know the lyrics to the various songs which are sung by the workers at Fox. But if her various claims had been challenged, could she have produced an informed discussion of any of these mandated tales?

On yesterday morning's show, Campos-Duffy was joined by the dull-as-dishwater Charlie Hurt. He has been named as a new co-host for this weekend program.

Will a third co-host be named? We can't tell you that.

For today, we thought it made sense to start with Campos-Duffy's remarks about Dr. Fauci, who she said is responsible for millions of deaths. If forced to guess, we'd guess that Campos-Duffy doesn't much know what she's singing about. 

But she knows the lyrics to the songs, and she seems like a true believer.

Campos-Duffy is extremely genial—until she starts singing these tribal songs. At a time when a certain possible madman has withdrawn protection from Dr. Fauci, it seemed to us that she's playing with a ring of fire as she advances her comments about the millions of people he killed.

That said, this is the pseudo-journalism we have chosen with our new journalistic arrangements. We'll be revisiting those key points as the week proceeds.

For the record, the singers to whom we refer today aren't found on a Texas chain gang! Before he humbly accepted his transfer to government service, Hegseth was being paid two or four million dollars per year, for just eight hours of weekly work!

Yesterday morning, Campos-Duffy was heatedly saying that "Fauci" was responsible for millions of deaths. The night before, we had seen the reinvented Lisa Boothe say, on the spectacularly stupid Big Weekend Show, that the Covid vaccine didn't work.

We wondered if either one of these workers knew what she was talking about. In fairness, each of these workers is conventionally telegenic and starts out with a genial affect.

One final point:

On yesterday's Fox & Friend Weekend, Campos-Duffy and her friends were singing the tribal songs of the current victors. On a different "cable news" channel, certain memorized songs are still being sung, though those are the mournful dirges of the recently vanquished.

The Fox News Channel employs Campos-Duffy. Who insists on continuing to put some of those shouters on our own Blue American air?

Tomorrow: More from the very same program


SUNDAY: Narrative genius improves on the truth!

SUNDAY, JANUARY 26, 2025

A drunken blues man, plus Becka: Based upon his own implied account, James Mangold is a narrative genius.

As we noted yesterday, he isn't constructing Wikipedia entries. He isn't one of those Disney Hall of the Presidents types.

He knows how to take a real-life story and make it many times better. This also happens to be one of the three thousand ways we Blues let the other guy win.

With that, we return to A Complete Unknown, the name of the new Mangold "fiction." (We're quoting the New York Times review when we use that puzzling term.)

Mangold is a highly skilled, very high-ranking, big-time Tinseltown figure. He knows how to make major movies. (For the record, he may also be the nicest guy in the world.)

As noted, the title is A Complete Unknown. Presumably, that refers to what his film's leading figure remains by the end of the Oscar-nominated film in question. 

What was the narrative arc of this film? What is supposed to have happened by the time it ends?

We saw the film on Thursday, and we have no real idea. On the other hand, we can tell you this:

Midway through A Complete Unknown, a somewhat funny thing happens. A character appears, then disappears. The character's name is "Becka."

That said, who the Son House is Becka supposed to be? Accurately or otherwise, here's what Vanity Fair and at least two other sources have said—and we've seen no one say different:

A Complete Unknown: What’s Fact and What’s Fiction in the Bob Dylan Biopic

[...]

A Complete Unknown also shows Dylan on the arm of a British woman named Becka, played by Laura Kariuki. She seems to be a complete fabrication. Someone who isn’t in the film, however, is Carolyn Hester, a significant figure in the folk revivalism scene who had Dylan sit in and blow harmonica on a version of “I’ll Fly Away” that became one of his first professional recording gigs. Hester was briefly married to Richard Fariña, the singer and author who later married and recorded with Joan Baez’s sister Mimi—just to show you how circular this whole scene was.

Hester doesn't appear in the film. Neither does Mike Seeger. (In his own memoir of the era, Dylan says, at some length, that he decided he'd have to start writing his own songs when he realized he could never perform traditional material anywhere as well as Mike Seeger could. We're speaking here about Mike Seeger, not about his older half-brother Pete.)

Hester is OUT, and so is Seeger. On the other hand, some person named Becka is IN. According to Vanity Fair, Becka is "a British woman" who also happens to be "a complete fabrication."

Becka appears in one fairly substantial scene. In that scene, she gobbles up a brace of concerns which, in the actual story of the actual lives, seem to have been borrowed from Suze Rotolo, Dylan's first (highly influential) New York City girl friend.

In one of the most grisly manifestations of Mangold's narrative genius, he dumbs the Rotolo character way, way down, turning here into a weepy girl friend who won't go away—a weepy girl friend who, judged upon her physical presentation, seems to have been picked up at a mixer at Miss Porter's. (More on that below.)

We'd call that portrait disrespectful and a disgrace. We'd say it reflects a grisly, highly familiar form of Tinseltown gender politics.

Luckily, Mangold is a narrative genius, so he decided to sub Becka in. Vanity Fair omits one somewhat surprising fact:

In the film, Becka isn't just British (and model-ready). Becka is also black!

Just like that, the young Dylan has a British-accented, model-ready black girl friend! At any rate, Becka comes and goes in that one fairly substantial scene. The Rotolo character is still crying over Dylan in at the 1965 Newport Folk Festival, which in real life she didn't attend.

In the film, she's till crying at Newport long after the actual Rotolo and the actual Dylan ceased to be a couple. Also, it was just a few months before Dylan married Sara Lownds (in November of that year).

As of Newport, Lownds was already pregnant with the first of the four children of their eight-year marriage. She goes completely unmentioned in this improved-upon-reality film.

Lownds remains completely unknown. Rotolo is still weeping, and she still looks like a refugee from Miss Porter's

For ourselves, we still hadn't quit on this childish film when the Becka character appeared. That said, we found her presence surprising.

We did find her presence surprising. Then, the loudmouth, drunk black Mississippi bluesman named Jesse Moffette appears.

Moffette's a fabrication too—a gift to us from a certain Hollywood genius. In the film, he's shown appearing on Rainbow Quest, a little-known TV show hosted (for only one season) by Pete Seeger—a show which didn't yet exist at the time the fabricated black bluesman appears.

Here's the problem:

Moffette isn't just a fabricated person. And it isn't just the fact that no one had ever appeared on Seeger's show at this point of time.

Also, it isn't the fact that Bob Dylan never showed up on the set of Rainbow Quest to interrupt the proceedings and to sit in with a Mississippi bluesman, as he does in the Hollywood film. 

In fact, Dylan never appeared on Rainbow Quest at all! The whole dumb scene is made up.

Here's the uglier problem:

It isn't just that "Jesse Moffette" is a fabricated black bluesman. Tinseltown's narrative genius also decided, for whatever reason, that "Moffette" should be presented a stereotypical black loudmouth and drunk.

According to the screenplay published by Deadline, this is the way the scene starts. This is basically the way the scene actually plays out in the film:

PETE (CONT’D) A friend from the deep Delta, Jesse Moffette, is in town this week headlining at Folk City, and he jumped a cab to join us live here at NJU. Jesse, good to see ya.

Pete sits down next to A TOWERING BLUESMAN in tie and jacket, holding a guitar. There’s a harmonica rack around his neck. High conk and wraparound shades. Jesse pulls out a bottle of peppermint schnapps, and interrupts [sic] a healthy swig.

JESSE MOFFETTE Not headlining. I open, then this white boy with a sketchy beard comes on after me and it’s like he’s reading the paper. He just sings the damned headlines.

Jesse holds the bottle out to Pete.

PETE Not while I’m working, thanks.

Sad.

Moffette's Fetchit-adjacent behavior continues along from there. Before too long, Dylan himself shows up and sits in with the fictional bluesman—with the fictional drunken black bluesman who didn't exist in real life.

Might we offer these thoughts?

As you can see by clicking this link, there were 39 episodes of Rainbow Quest in its one little-noticed season. Several "black bluesmen" did in fact appear.

You can see Sonny Terry and Brownie McGhee's appearance by clicking this. Sonny and Brownie were dignified men. They weren't stereotypical drunks.

Neither was the gentle, soft-spoken Mississippi John Hurt. You can see him here.

How about the Reverend Gary Davis? If you want to see a stunningly beautiful performance of one form of American music, we'll advise you to just click this.

(Yes, that's Donovan on the same show, 19 or 20 years old at the time. As for Rev. Davis, his performance just grows and grows. He was a remarkably handsome man who performed with remarkable conviction.)

None of these people showed up drunk or drinking. None of them showed up complaining about white boys on some bill. 

That came from the puzzling mind of a Tinseltown narrative genius. Then came the work song gang.

By now, we've reached this movie's clown-car car-wreck final scenes, at Newport 1965. 

Johnny Cash wasn't at Newport that year. But he shows up there in the film, enjoyably wrecking several cars as he tries to drive away. 

Joan Baez wasn't there on the night in question, but she gets shoehorned in too. It makes the reality better!

The actual person named Suze Rotolo wasn't present at Newport either. In the creatively brilliant film, the Rotolo character gets shoehorned into these closing scenes, still weeping and crying over the boyfriend she has lost to Joan, still looking like an escapee from Miss Porter's.

(The actual Rotolo was the Gotham-born daughter of Italian immigrant Communist parents. A narrative genius seemed to know that her physical affect—so memorable and so beloved from the iconic Freewheelin' album cover—would have had to be cleaned up.)

Cash and Rotolo and Baez weren't there. Famously, Dylan was. In the "fictional" film, just before he takes to the stage, this incongruous scene occurs:

PETE (O.S.) Let’s welcome the Texas Prison Worksong Group! 

CUT TO:

EXT. NEWPORT FOLK FESTIVAL — STAGE — NIGHT

Pete Seeger, center stage... Behind him, SIX MEN IN PRISON GARB carrying axes, under the watch of AN ARMED GUARD.

PETE Six men serving life and the guard is not a prop! Neither’s the tree trunk!

THE MEN circle the tree, axes in hand, and start their singing and chopping. 

Offstage: Alan Lomax approaches Pete.

ALAN LOMAX We saw Bob. Came away with a handful of air. It’s gotta be you, Pete

(“Hammer Ring” performed by Texas Prison Worksong Group featuring Oren Waters)

Say what? At the closing concert of the festival, Dylan is about to go on stage. 

His opening act seems to be the Texas Prison Worksong Group—six men in prison garb, carrying axes, under the watch of an armed guard? With Pete Seeger on the festival stage, saying this?

Six men serving life and the guard is not a prop! Neither’s the tree trunk!

Is that what happened that fateful night? If not, why in the world did a narrative genius shove it into his film?

Full disclosure! A group called the "Texas Work Song Group" ("prison" unmentioned) did perform at Newport in 1965. Based upon the festival's brochures, they took part in a pair of workshops on Friday afternoon. They then appeared in the lengthy concert on Friday night, where they were one of fourteen different acts.

Based upon the official brochures, they took part in no events after that—not on Saturday, not on Sunday. Based upon the official brochures, they did not appear in the closing concert on that fateful Sunday night.

The appearance of this group in this festival was part of the slightly eccentric "folk music" culture of that particular time—a culture which might seem somewhat quirky today. 

Newport featured some very famous performers. It also featured various people no one had ever heard of. For example:

In that Friday night concert, the Texas Work Song Group shared the bill with Peter, Paul and Mary and also with Pete Seeger. They also shared the bill with an act called "New York Street Games." For better or for worse, the world of Newport was like that.

(Here's Pete Seeger at Newport, playing for the Blue Ridge Mountain Dancers. They weren't a famous group.)

There actually was a "Texas Work Song Group" at Newport in 1965. Did they perform in the manner shown in the film? Did Seeger ever say the things he's shown saying in that screenplay?

We have no idea.

That said, why did the narrative giant decide to insert a gang of black convicts into the stew, following on his drunken Mississippi bluesman and the irascible, obnoxious black attendant who suddenly and strangely appears on the screen during one of Dylan's visits to see Woody Guthrie—during one of the visits which didn't actually occur?

Why were these black characters inserted into the film? More appallingly, why were these black character, British-accented Becka excepted, portrayed in the amazingly familiar old ways Mangold weirdly chose?

Regarding the stereotyping of the loudmouths, drunks and convicts, we have no idea. As to why these people are in this film at all, we do have a small idea.

James Mangold is a narrative genius. He may also be a seeker of prizes and of cash.

By clicking here, you can possibly start to see why these black characters were shoehorned in. It's part of the low-IQ rush toward "DEI" which followed the lonesome murder of George Floyd in late May 2020.

Those of us in Blue America often rushed to display our good faith in the wake of that highly visible killing. In a million different ways, we proved an unmistakable fact:

There's no such thing as a good intention which can't be unwisely pursued.

In our race toward "DEI" and "Woke," we gave the gang on the Fox News Channel a hundred and one easy ways to say how phony and dumb we are. We're still out there, this very day, continuing to hand them these gifts. 

Why was the invented bluesman portrayed as a loudmouth and as a drunk?  You'll have to ask Mangold himself—and no one ever will.

Why were the black performers inserted into the closing Sunday night concert a bunch of convicts from Texas? You'll have to ask him that too.

What was the point of that sudden intrusion by that loudmouth black attendant? Why was the invented "Becka" shoved into this film at all?

You'll have to ask Mangold those questions.  As hosts on Fox News keep mocking our dumbness, none of us Blues ever will.

Our view?

The refashioning of the Rotolo character struck us as a pathetic example of throwback gender politics. The insertion of those invented black characters struck us as one of the strangest and most appalling things we've seen in recent years.

All along the watchtower, Blue America's elites have failed to question—even to notice—these puzzling choices by Mangold. So it has gone, for decades now, as we Blues pretend to be the kinds of people we pretty much aren't, but also as we name-call everyone else.

In making a "fiction" film of this kind, the money comes from using real names. The "fiction" comes when a self-admitted narrative genius starts changing real facts all around.

The wife is gone, the girl friend stays! Needless to say, she's a weeper.

The real Bob Dylan once recorded the words shown below. These words appear on the Freewheelin' album—the early album which featured an actual engaging young woman right there on its still-famous cover.

The young man's words were full of whimsy. This is what a very young man whimsically said:

Unlike most of the songs nowadays that are being written uptown in Tin Pan Alley—that's where most of the folk songs come from nowadays. This, this is a song, this wasn't written up there. 

This was written somewhere down in the United States!

In our view, Mangold's remarkably empty film comes from Tin Pan Alley. To our eye and ear, it seems to contain some amazingly strange and weirdly familiar old hooks, and we Blues have been eating it up! 

No one has questioned, or even mentioned, the puzzling hooks we've cited. Despite the claims we like to make, we Blues just aren't super sharp.

On the brighter side, Mangold managed to check the boxes which let him pursue a very big prize. This is one the three million ways that fellow got back to the White House.

Final suggestion: Don't fail to watch the Rev. Davis. That is an amazing performance—a piece of Americana. 

SATURDAY: The casting call has been completed!

SATURDAY, JANUARY 24, 2025

The strongman's no longer last: In fairness, Tinseltown's James Mangold is an accomplished maker of entertaining Hollywood feature films.

He even made two X-man movies! He did so when he was approaching 50, then when he was more than 50 years old.

In 2005, he directed Walk the Line. That film didn't strike us as silly or as flyweight infested at all. 

Walk the Line didn't strike us that way. We can't say the same about A Complete Unknown.

Mangold may be the world's nicest person—but could he also be a conceptual flyweight? Unless he's being unfairly quoted, these are some of the things he has said when questions have been asked about the accuracy of certain elements of his current film about someone called "Bob Dylan:"

Fact-checking 'A Complete Unknown': What the Bob Dylan movie gets right, wrong

[...]

[D]irector James Mangold was not making a documentary, and as such felt free to play with events and dates in the early 1960s to keep his movie moving along.

"You make a biopic and there’s an assumption you’re doing a history lesson with text on the screen labeling things, but I had no interest in that," Mangold tells USA TODAY. "I wanted to tell the story with the same authority as a fiction film, where the dates don’t matter so much. I kept saying, 'We’re not doing the Disney Hall of Presidents, where the animatronic president does a famous speech."

Mangold said he wasn't "doing the Disney Hall of Presidents." He said he "wanted to tell the story with the same authority as a fiction film." 

On that basis, it seemed to USA Today that he "felt free to play with events." 

That's what it said in this flimsy piece in USA Today. Here's what it said in a much longer truth-check by Variety:

‘A Complete Unknown’ Fact vs. Fiction: Experts Go Deep on What’s True or Fanciful in the Celebrated Biopic

[...]

[T]he long answer involves acknowledging director James Mangold’s film taking liberties in terms of a condensation of timelines, the conjoining of separate incidents, fictional character names in a couple of cases, and moments of sheer imagination and fictionalization. It’s certainly possible to enjoy “A Complete Unknown” without stressing too much over which parts are fact and which are fanciful. But for those who want to take a deep dive into how much the movie aligns with the known historical record, we looked to several Dylan experts to help sort it out.

[...]

Mangold recently told Variety that the film is “not a Wikipedia entry” and he didn’t feel a fealty to a documentary level of facts—but also pointed out that, besides relying on Wald’s book and other historical source material, he based his version of the script (co-written with Jay Cocks) on many hours he spent personally talking with Dylan. In any case, many of those who’ve been in Dylan’s orbit over the years have given it high marks. Kevin Odegard, who played guitar on “Blood on the Tracks,” wrote, “We loved every minute…Critics who pick apart the imaginative world of composite characters and compacted historical footnotes are the dogs who caught the car. They miss the emotional punch of James Mangold’s poignant Hollywood movie."

All hail the "imaginative" genius! He said he wasn't constructing "a Wikipedia entry." 

Beyond that, a guitarist thought the film was great. This assessment separates the guitarist from the dogs who caught the car. 

Kissing industry ascot as it frequently does, Variety hurried the guitarist's analysis into its piece. Are there flyweight aspects to what Mangold has done? If so, the infestation doesn't seem to be restricted to him.

As we'll note tomorrow, this creative debacle links to one of the ways we Blue Americans managed to lose, even if narrowly, to the current commander in chief. It's now completely clear, as of this morning, that he has cast himself in the role of a lifetime—in the role of American Strongman. 

Our own sacred Troy is already in flames, even as we speak. How did we ever lose to this guy? In our view, part of the answer is blowing in the gales of hot air inside James Mangold's entertaining fictional film.

Those gales of hot air involve quite a few invented people and places. For the record, we'll guess that quite a few of those inventions relate to the recent Tinseltown artefact you can explore by clicking here.

We've always advised staying away from our own Blue America's endless array of name-calls and bombs. That said, several of those inventions struck us as bizarrely racist-adjacent. Beyond that, the gender politics of this film struck us as grisly and throwback pretty much all the way down.

That gender politics is also built on the film's inventions—on its inventions and its disappearances.

Sara Lownds doesn't appear in this film; Suze Rotolo isn't permitted to leave. Black characters were invented out of whole cloth and were then portrayed in peculiar ways. All too often, this is the bullsh*t we've chosen.

We'll offer more on this painful mess tomorrow or possibly Monday.  For today, a certain apparent nutcase is in the saddle and is riding Americankind.

It's now clear that he's casting himself in the role of a lifetime. That said, we think Mangold's film helps tell a story about the way we Blue Americans weren't sharp enough, over the course of quite a few years, to keep this change from a-happenin'.

(We were like the townfolk of Oran. In fairness, The Plague was plainly a work of a certain type of fiction.)

Sara isn't in the film. Suze just keeps hanging around, tears streaming down her sad face. A bunch of (rather peculiar) black characters get invented and shoehorned in. To our eye and ear, a few of those characters get presented in weirdly familiar old ways. 

How did we ever lose to that guy? In part, is this the Tin Pan Alley dumbness we Blues have persistently chosen?

MADNESS: Why isn't this what madness looks like?

FRIDAY, JANUARY 24, 2025

A nutcase, completely unknown: In full fairness, let it be said:

Manohla Dargis is a highly accomplished film critic. In her review for the New York Times, she didn't rank A Complete Unknown as an "NYT Critic's Pick."

In her review, she seemed to work the old double switch. She seemed to praise the (Oscar-nominated) film to the skies, but she didn't afford it the status of a Critic's Pick. 

Along the way, she made a remark which captures the current state of western world cogitation. Tomorrow, we'll offer our own thoughts about the film. For today, here's the odd thing Dargis said:

‘A Complete Unknown’ Review: Timothée Chalamet Goes Electric

Every so often in “A Complete Unknown,” an enjoyably easy-listening and -watching fiction about Bob Dylan’s early road to immortality, Timothée Chalamet lowers his gaze and sends a shiver up your spine. It’s as startling as it is welcome because Chalamet has never seemed especially threatening, even in his more darkly messianic moments in the “Dune” series. He seems too anodyne to play a disruptive trickster like Dylan, yet Chalamet proves an ideal conduit in “A Complete Unknown” because the music and its maker have such power. As with any great cover band, it’s the original material that carries you through the night.

[...]

“A Complete Unknown” probably won’t please Dylan purists or anyone, really, who’s a stickler for documentary facticity in fiction. The movie blurs and plays with years and events, creating a generally seamless narrative out of a messy life as it glances at the larger world (the Cuban missile crisis, the civil rights movement). Some of these global affairs affect the characters more directly than others. Yet while the world’s sorrows and outrages help fuel the folk scene, its finger-pointing (Dylan’s term) protest songs, its politics and concerns, are subsumed by vague notions of authenticity, which are embodied by the suffocatingly sincere Pete and the more openly strident musicologist Alan Lomax (Norbert Leo Butz).

We gave you the two complete paragraphs. In fairness, Dargis didn't invent this particular hook, but there it, just as plain as a Ballad in Plain D.

The film is "fiction," she oddly says. Why would a "purist" seek "facticity" in a fictional work like that?

Is the film in question "fiction?" If so, it's a peculiar offshoot of that species—an offshoot which, in a slightly more rational world, might have been completely unknown.

The film is fiction—except for the fact that its protagonist is a young singer whose name seems to be "Bob Dylan." 

Also, the film is fiction except for the fact that it ends up in an embarrassing, clown car scene at the (1965) Newport Folk Festival, with the fictional character known as "Bob Dylan" strumming a few songs.

He even agrees to sing a duet with a fictional character who's known in the film as "Joan Baez!" And forgive us, but in the dumbest moment of the whole film, someone actually says the following as a brawl is taking place:

"Sorry, Odetta," someone says, speaking to another character who happens to be backstage.

Fellow humans, please! On what planet—within what realm of cogitation—does any of this qualify as "fiction?" 

To appearances, it qualifies as fiction within the human realm in which we want to have our history and gimmick it pleasingly too. It qualifies as fiction within the realm a 21-year-old performer chose to burlesque when he introduced a song this way right there on his second album:

Unlike most of the songs nowadays that are being written uptown in Tin Pan Alleythat's where most of the folk songs come from nowadaysthis, this is a song, this wasn't written up there. This was written somewhere down in the United States!

According to the whimsical statement by this very young person, most of the "folk songs" of that day were coming from Tin Pan Alley! In our view, the Oscar-nominated "fictional" film was assembled in that same locale. 

In our view, A Complete Unknown was assembled up there too! But also, we'll point to the latest thing the (apparent) nutcase has said.

The (apparent) madman was speaking to the (fictional) "cable news" journalist. Twelve minutes into Wednesday night's TV show, demonstrably at 9:12 Eastern, the (apparent) madman, an actual person, for some reason vocalized this:

ACTUAL PERSON (1/22/25): I think one thing is happening is, people are learning that they [apparently, the Democratic Party] can't govern and that their policies are terrible. 

I mean, they don't want to see a woman get pummeled by a man in a boxing ring. They don't want to see men in women's sports in other ways. And they don't want to see them, and they don't want to have transgender for everybody. They don't want to have a child leave home as a boy and come home two days later as a girl.

A parent doesn't want to see that. And there are states where that can happen.

According to this actual person, parents "don't want to have a child leave home as a boy and come home two days later as a girl." Based on what this person said, that can't happen in every state—but there are states where it can!

And yes, that's what he actually said. To see him as he actually says it, you can just click here.

At this point, let's make sure that you understand the basics of what we've just said: 

An actual person actually said that on a putative "cable news" program. He said that to a second actual person—to an actual person who is the multimillion-dollar employee of the alleged news station.

Also, it gets worse. The second person—the employee—had said this just a moment before:

"We've known each other for thirty years, so we have a friendship and we have a professional relationship."

That's what the second person said. We'll assert that he was acting from his friendship when he didn't say a word—didn't strum a single chord—about what the first person said.

Once again, here's what that first person said:

He said it can't happen in every state—but in some states, he said it can happen! 

In those states, a child can leave home as a boy and come home two days later as a girl. Parents don't want that to happen, this apparent nutcase actually said—and yes, you can see him say it!

Our question to you this morning is simple. We'll skip past the other million and one crazy statements this apparent nutcase has made in recent weeks, months and years.

Our challenge to you is very simple. Review again what that first person said. After that, riddle us this:

On what planet—in what realm—is that not presumed to be the statement of an apparent madman? Of someone who seems to be some version of crazy or insane or, more politely, just some form of mentally ill?

In what realm is that actual person not described as a "nutcase?" Today we have answering of questions:

The realm in which he's not insane is the ream in which that Oscar-nominated film is somehow said to be "fiction." It's the realm of jumbled human cognition—a realm in which various guilds, Red and Blue alike, have long been performing their various puzzling roles in the play.

That one person told the other that that can actually happen! It can happen somewhere down in the United States, though not in all the states. 

The second person, cast as a "cable news" person, didn't ask him to name the states to which he referred—to explain what in the name of sanity he could possibly be talking about.

That second person just kept going, pretending that nothing had happened. And then, in stepped David brooks and Rachel Maddow and Krugman and David French.

In stepped Lawrence O'Donnell; Bret and Gail stepped in too. Nicolle Wallace kept performing her part in the play. None of them made the world's obvious statement: 

By any normal reckoning, the first of those actual persons had made a crazy remark. By normal reckoning, when people keep making statements like that, we tend to say that such people are crazy—seem to be some form of insane.  

Dargis pretended that the film in question is fiction. Brooks is pretending too. But this is one of the fictions our guilds have all chosen, and this is the realm we inhabit. 

(Also, Al Gore said he invented the internet. Starting 25 years ago, they all started saying that!)

For the record, none of this is going to change. To all appearances, this is one of the basic ways our imperfect species is wired.

Man [sic] is the rational animal? Various people have challenged that song. The rest of us take what those people have said and kick their remarks to the curb.

I Pity the Poor Immigrant, the actual Dylan once wrote. As we've noted in the past, he was speaking of the very person who, on this Wednesday night, made his latest nutcase remark.

All along the alleged watchtower, good decent people like Stephens and Brooks are refusing to state the obvious truth.

They're refusing to say that this actual person seems to be a nutcase. This is the way we substitute fictions for the less pleasing realm called plain truth.