TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 11, 2025
So goes the Fox News Channel: Who the Sam Hill is Zohran Mamdani? Because he's now mayor-elect of New York City, inquiring minds may want to know.
One day after he was elected, NPR's Rachel Treisman attempted to puzzle it out. Headline included, her "explainer" piece started like this:
EXPLAINER
NYC's next mayor is a democratic socialist. What does that mean?
New York City has elected a democratic socialist as its next mayor.
Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani won with a progressive platform focused on making the city more affordable, through free bus service, frozen rents, universal childcare and a higher minimum wage, among other ideas.
The state assemblymember represented both the Democratic Party and the Working Families Party on the ballot. He quoted prominent late-19th and early-20th century socialist Eugene Debs in his victory speech Tuesday night. And he is a longtime member of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA).
[...]
As Mamdani's campaign pushed democratic socialism further into the mainstream, it has also raised questions about what the political ideology is—and isn't.
Most notably, President Trump has frequently and falsely criticized Mamdani as a communist in the lead-up to the election. Mamdani refuted that characterization in a June appearance on NBC's Meet the Press, to which he responded, "I am not."
Mamdani went on to describe his brand of democratic socialism, a term that is largely up to interpretation.
In our view, Treisman went on to make a valiant attempt to describe Mamdani's stated version of "democratic socialism." Four days later, the trio of friends on the Fox News Channel's Fox & Friends Weekend authored an alternate portrait of who and what Mamdani, and the rest of the Democratic Party, actually is and are.
If we were to paraphrase what was said, we'd paraphrase it like this:
Communist Communist Communist Communist! Obama Obama Obama!
That account of what was said might be oversimplified. But if so, it isn't over-simplified by much.
The portrait in question was painted by this program's three regular co-hosts. Pete Hegseth and Will Cain are now long gone from the mix. The line-up now looks like this:
Co-hosts, Fox & Friends Weekend
Charlie Hurt
Rachel Campos-Duffy
Griff Jenkins
Campos-Duffy remains the straw which stirs this program's drink. As we've often noted, she's an exceptionally genial morning show performer—but only with respect to her friends.
The conversation we're about to describe took place near the start of the program's 7 a.m. hour. A person could spend a week examining the various things which were said, but we're going to move along a bit more quickly. As a general matter, we'll say this:
The conversation these lunkheads created helps illustrate the way our failing nation is being turned into a pair of dueling tribes. It illustrates the problem which arises when a major entity like the Fox News Channel adopts the practice known as "segregation by viewpoint"—when it hires people who will agree with each other on every possible point while giving voice to every aspect of their channel's corporate messaging.
Our guess this morning will be this:
Very few people in Blue America will be aware of how far off the rails these conversations have gone. That's because no major news org or journalist in Blue America reports and discusses the ridiculous fare which is routinely presented on the Fox News Channel.
For whatever reason, these conversations are disappeared by Blue America's academics and journalists.
The conversation to which we refer starts right here, at 7:03 a.m. It continues along for the next ten minutes. This its principal theme:
Communist Communist Communist Communist! Obama Obama Obama!
As a bit of a saving grace, Campos-Dufy and Hurt didn't perform the vaudeville act they'd been performing in the previous several months. As part of this presentation, Campos-Duffy describes Mamdani as a Communist, and Hurt jumps in with this:
"A full-blown Communist."
At least that wasn't said this day. But as Campos-Duffy motored along, saying Communist Communist Obama Obama, very few other cries of alarm were actually left unsaid.
We won't transcribe the bulk of this segment. It started with videotape of former president Biden speaking at a fund-raider the previous night, with Campos-Duffy offering this:
HURT (11/8/25): Holy cow! It's like, he's not all there
CAMPOS-DUFFY (11/8/25): Again, shame on Jill Biden. She should be taking care of him. She should be enjoying him now that he's back home. Instead, she's like, "Get back out there!" There's no reason for Joe Biden to be out there now because he's not the leader of the party.
No one asked Campos-Duffy how she knew the role Jill Biden had played in this matter. She was simply advancing a familiar bit of demonization aimed at the former first lady.
So far, no Communists had been spotted. Inevitably, that small mercy would soon reach its end. At 7:06, the time-honored term of political panic was heard for the very first time:
CAMPOS-DUFFY: So there is a battle inside of the party. And it's sort of like—
People say it's, like, the establishment Democrats versus the Communist/socialist wing, and I don't think that's quite what it is. I think it's those who are out and proud as socialists and those who think they still have to hide it, the way Obama did back in 2008.
Within this world, is a Communist the same thing as a socialist? At this juncture, that point still wasn't clear. Nor was it clear what this corporate TV star meant by either of these famous terms.
At the very least, it now seemed to be clear that everyone in the Democratic Party was at least a socialist. Also, that Candidate Obama hid that fact about himself during Campaign 2008.
Obama had always been at least a socialist—but what did that claim even mean? Neither of Campos-Duffy's friends asked, and the colloquy continued from there.
Are the Democrats a bunch of Communists, or are they merely socialists? Campos-Duffy was soon telling her friends this
CAMPOS-DUFFY: The debate isn't, "Are we socialist or Communists or not?" The debate is, "Should we tell everyone or not?"
It's a great point, Jenkins said. Soon we were on to this:
CAMPOS-DUFFY: [Obama] had to lie to us in 2008. But some of us were on to him. [Group laughter] I was!
Obama had lied about being a socialist, or maybe about being a Communist, way back in 2008! But Campos-Duffy had known all along.
With that, the friends began discussing the subpoenas which the DOJ had reportedly been sent to several former officials as part of the latest investigation of "the origins of the Trump-Russia probe." After a series of shaky claims, Campos-Duffy said this about that original probe:
CAMPOS-DUFFY: This weaponization of government—this very Communist idea of "I'm going to use intel agencies that are meant to capture terrorists to go after my own political opponents, and I'm going to use the government to take down a president who was duly elected and concoct this whole Russia collusion thing...—this whole thing was so toxic and it all starts with Obama.
When you look at Mamdani winning here in New York City as a Communist, don't think about Mamdani—think about Obama. Everything that's bad that's happened, go back to Obama.
Mamdani won New York City as a Communist, we were now told. But it all goes back to Barack Obama, this Obama-loather now said.
Indeed, that original probe had been very Communist, Campos-Duffy said. The other friends nodded along.
People watching this segregated show are routinely handed a novel—a novelized story about recent American history. A different form of moral and intellectual disorder prevails at 10 p.m. each weekday night on the aggressively stupid Gutfeld! show.
Gutfeld! is the third most-watched TV program in our nation's "cable news" industry. The New York Times has finally begun to write about this extremely unusual program—but the Times still seems reluctant to report what happens on this show.
Our guess this morning will be this:
Very few people in Blue America will be aware of how far off the rails the Fox News Channel's major programs have gone. That's because no major journalist or news org in Blue America reports and discusses the contents of this channel's actual fare.
For whatever reason, the contents of this channel's programs have been disappeared by Blue America's academics and journalists. Campos-Duffy goes unreported and undiscussed. So does the very strange Gutfeld.
Who the heck is Zohran Mamdani? He's a Communist, Fox News viewers were told.
Also, it all goes back to Barack Obama! It sounds like President Obama was a Communist all along. His conduct was very Communist.
This is very low-end stuff. It's also the soul of the Fox News Channel, and it's worth reporting.
On Gutfeld!, the disorder takes a different form. For whatever reason, the New York Times still refuses to report what actually happens on that extremely strange "cable news" show.
Tomorrow: Blatantly false from the start
ReplyDelete"Who the heck is Zohran Mamdani?"
Just another political manipulator trying to enrich himself, most likely. Sort of like Obama.
Will find out eventually.
Who is he? He is the Mayor-elect of NYC. Why pretend that no one knows who he is, Somerby? People in NYC elected him, so they must feel they know who he is and why they voted for him over the other options (Sliwa, Cuomo).
DeleteHaHaHa if coming from a Trump supporter.
DeleteBoth Communist and Socialist are such vague terms that it’s impossible to give a precise definition. They may not be absolute synonyms, but there certainly is considerable overlap.
ReplyDeleteI saw a poll the other day showing that more college students prefer socialism to capitalism.
"Socialist" is currently synonymous with "neoliberal". At least in Europe.
DeleteWe are not in Europe.
DeleteOn the Democratic Socialist webpage for my loca chapter, all of the people in the photos are 20-30 years old.
Would you prefer capitalism after the fight we are going through over increases in insurance premiums, inflation affecting groceries, switch by newspapers to subscription models, increased advertising on streaming services, the involvement of corporations and billionaires in political scandals and massive govt layoffs? Capitalism seems to have ruined our democracy and people's lives via their greed. Young people read more and do not remember better times. They want change now, and I don't blame them.
If France, Germany, Sweden, UK are Socialist, then I definitely prefer Capitalism. Socialism is essentially a statist arrangement, similar to fascism.
DeleteExtensive research via this newfangled internet thing found this:
DeleteCommunism features communal ownership of all property and a stateless, classless society where distribution is based on need, while socialism involves communal ownership of the means of production but allows for some private property.
"socialism involves communal ownership of the means of production"
DeleteThat's in the past. Nowadays it involves nothing like that.
Here is what Mamdani and the Democratic Socialist Party says about its beliefs:
Delete"We believe that our government and our workplaces should be run democratically by workers like us to meet the needs of our community, not to enrich billionaires, millionaires, and those who do their bidding. We oppose all forms of oppression and believe everyone has a right to healthcare, housing, a living wage, and more. We know the rich and powerful manipulate politicians, the law, and the economy to their benefit, and that only an organized movement of millions of working class people can create a society that works for all of us. You can find our full political platform here:
https://platform.dsausa.org/
Politicians have no beliefs.
DeleteAnd what they, all of them, say about their fake "beliefs" is always the same: they are for everything good and against everything bad.
If you believe this, you have no way of figuring out which ones to vote for. You might use their track record -- the things they actually voted for or against in their previous office.
DeleteRegardless what they say, in the US one has a general idea: usually all you need to decide if you're pro-business or pro-government bureaucracy.
DeleteBut nowadays the government bureaucracy has gotten too entrenched, too powerful, and too corrupt. The swamp. This changes the equation.
Both Communist and Socialist are such vague terms that it’s impossible to give a precise definition. They may not be absolute synonyms, but there certainly is considerable overlap.
DeleteThere's a considerable overlap between the terms that you can't define, David? Got it!
Jesus all you people are ignorant. Bernie Sanders has long advertised as as a Democratic Socialist in the mold of Western European Democracies. These countries know to tax folks a bit more, and make sure everyone has good commons, including healthcare. No conservative or liberal would run on ending government healthcare, it would be political suicide. And there is plenty of rich people and capitalistic corporations to make all the greedy fucks who hate Christ happy.
DeleteIn Communism "property property" refers to the means of production. Communism permits and has no issue with owning personal property. Marx went on and on about this, yet many continue to misinform on this topic.
DeleteDuring the Russian revolution, personal property was confiscated by the state, including household items. How is it misinformation?
DeleteThe Soviet Union was a socialist country, that's fact. No private ownership of the means of production; all capital assets owned by the state. If that's not socialist, then nothing is.
DeleteSome personal property was confiscated by the state during the Russian revolution: bourgeoisie-owned property, like mansions, cars, large plots of land. Assets. But not simple personal property, like clothing and small personal items.
The Soviet Union was not socialist, their stated goal was communism, but they were aware that they were operating under a system of state capitalism, they wrote about this explicitly, if one bothers to read the leaders of the USSR.
DeleteThe Soviet Union existed for more than half a century. It seems likely it said different things at different times and evolved in various ways.
DeleteYes Stalin was very different from Lenin, but even Lenin knew that while the goal was socialism/communism, they were actually operating a system of state capitalism, he addressed this directly.
DeleteSomerby might perform an actual service if he were to attempt to define what Fox News hosts mean when they use the terms communist and socialist. We get the point that they are not using the terms the way Democrats do, or the way that political theorists or academics use them, but what DO they mean by them?
ReplyDeleteHave any right wingers attempted to define socialist and communist? If so, what is their definition? Somerby could research that and tell his readers what the right understands when they hear the terms spoken on Fox.
Somerby must savor the generosity of the many Anons who volunteer to be his assignment editor.
DeleteSomerby has become more and more incompetent as a blogger as he ages. Why is he still writing this vanity blog?
DeleteHe’s still writing because he has a mental disorder. Pity the child.
DeleteBecause you are still reading it.
DeleteDogface, I will say this slowly. Somerby does not read his comments. If he doesn't read his comments, how can they be reinforcing his blog-writing behavior? If he does not read any of his comments, then neither my comments nor anyone else's are having any impact on him. So it doesn't matter whether I write comments or not, nor what I say in them.
DeleteCommunism is often associated with the Soviet Union and China, but this is ignorant; both Russia and China have a long history of being right wing societies and the USSR and the PRC operated/operate under a right wing authoritarian system called "state capitalism".
DeleteRight wing authoritarians, fascists, dictators etc have a long history of adopting leftist rhetoric and aesthetics as a way of legitimizing their unnatural inclinations, since human nature is inherently egalitarian.
Communism in essence is two things 1) a critique of capitalism with it's boom and bust cycles leading to greater wealth inequality and 2) a call for more democracy in the workplace.
Marx was cutting edge in his day, but his work has been superseded by advances in behavioral science over the past 50-60 years.
Fox News trying to pigeon hole Obama as a socialist is just a laughably bad attempt to whitewash their own racism.
In reality, Obama campaigned as a progressive but governed as a corporatist and a neoliberal (right wing stances), in the style of Clinton.
Obama really was a flash point and inflection point for Republicans because of how foundational racism is to their worldview and to gaining power.
Republicans want to now present Obama as a sort of reversion to the mean, since Dems are easier to dominate when they are centrist neoliberals, as they have been since the 80s.
Republicans feel threatened by people like Sanders, AOC, and Mamdani because those people are heading a movement that really does threaten the existence of the modern iteration of the Republican Party - a party that once helped free the slaves and fight the robber barons and their monopolies, but has since been captured by reactionaries and the Party's values have completely flipped.
"Dogface, I will say this slowly."
DeleteI'm pretty sure that's the only way you can say it.
So, you aren’t here to discuss, just insult.
Delete"Somerby does not read his comments."
DeleteI will say this slowly: You have no idea whether Somerby reads comments, or how many he reads. Your statement is just some shit you made up. (But you might ponder how some comments disappear if Somerby never reads them.)
He has said he doesn’t read comments. Are you calling him a liar? You cannot be saying that he blogs just to read my generally critical comments. More likely it is to hear Cecelia’s declarations of love.
DeleteI think some comments are filtered by blogspot software for violating standards.
You can prove you're not a liar by showing us where Somerby said he doesn't read comments.
DeleteOtherwise . . . .
No, I’m not looking up quotes for you.
DeleteJust as I figured.
Delete"Bob Somerby has never publicly provided an in-depth explanation for why he doesn't read his blog comments. He simply stated in a social media interaction, "Nope -- I just post (sorry!)", indicating that avoiding the comments section is his personal preference or policy, perhaps to save time or avoid the often contentious nature of online comments."
DeleteHere is what AI says:
"Bob Somerby has often stated on his blog, The Daily Howler, that he does not read the comments section. This is not a single, isolated statement but rather a long-standing policy or a frequently repeated aside within his posts, often included as a general note to readers or in response to a reader's email.
He has repeatedly mentioned this in a general sense over the years in the text of various posts on his site, sometimes to explain why he isn't engaging with points made in the comments or why he prefers communication via email. He has also lamented the presence of spam and trolls in the comments and the time required to moderate them.
The sentiment has appeared in many different posts over the years, making it part of his blog's consistent communication style rather than a single, specific declaration from one unique, identifiable moment. The statement in a general sense has been a well-known aspect of his blog for a long time."
“If he does not read any of his comments, then neither my comments nor anyone else's are having any impact on him. So it doesn't matter whether I write comments or not, nor what I say in them.”
DeleteSo if we called Digby a pedophile and a political con-artist that would be fine as long as she didn’t read the remark. Holy cow. That’s freaking sociopathic AND imbecilic.
@Anon 2:22PM --Perfect comment, thanks.
DeleteDigby turned off the comments to her blog nearly 20 years ago. Anyone who is a political pundit gets a lot of shit in comments because you guys on the right are ugly people. That is what lack of empathy combined with hostility does to you. The cruelty is the point for people like you, Trump, Noem, Hegseth and the whole bunch of sociopaths surrounding Dear Leader. Don't go all high and mighty about Democrats saying mean things to Somerby when he says stuff like women shouldn't drink if they don't want to be raped at frat parties, or black students are inventing microaggressions because racism is no longer a thing and they have no real examples of it in their lives. So you can take your pseudo-caring about Digby into the gravel pit and shoot it.
DeleteCecelia, Dogface said that Somerby was here because of commenters. That cannot be true if he never reads the comments. No one said the comments wouldn't affect those reading them.
Delete"Dogface said that Somerby was here because of commenters."
DeleteThis, too, is false. And 3:59, perhaps AI is hallucinating, taking commenters' words that "Somerby doesn't read his comments" and attributing them to Somerby. After all, it's something that is said so many times by commenters, why wouldn't AI believe it?
Anonymouse 4:39pm, no, it’s you deem mistreatment via the politics of the person/target involved. I used Digby as an example because she’s someone you might care about. Why launch into a screed on the perfidies of rightwing commenters insulting Digby after arguing that character assassination is benign unless the target is aware of the insults/charges. Anonymices have called Bob everything from a pedophile to a Russian agent and you suggest that’s fine because you insist that he doesn’t read his comments. Now you’ve changed your argument from your slander being harmless because Bob is unaware of your insults, to arguing he deserves it. You aren’t smart and you aren’t a good person.
DeleteI asked why Somerby is still writing his blog and you said "Because you are still reading it."
DeleteYou are being excessively literal as usual.
If I were reading the blog but not commenting, Somerby would have no idea I was reading it. But Somerby does not read his comments, so the comments I write (which show I am here), are not affecting whether he blogs or not).
And today you are having fun calling me a liar and saying that my responses are false (due to your excessively literal reading). Now you want to claim that AI is false too. While that is possible, usually its mistakes are in the specifics. If it could find no evidence that Somerby has ever said he doesn't read comments, it would have said so. AI is more capable of combing through Somerby's 27 years of blogging than I am. I have found errors in AI but this one seems unlikely given that so many of us also recall Somerby saying that he doesn't read his comments, including Kevin Drum, who said it in one of his own blog essays (the one on Mississippi school reading progress).
But your main reason for being here seems to be to name-call and disparage others. So nothing I can cite or say is going to stop you from being an asshole troll. Just because you have a nym, doesn't make you someone with anything to say.
Cecelia, I never said that blog comments were benign.
DeleteCecelia, I disagreed that Somerby was here because I was reading him. If I didn't comment, he wouldn't know whether I was here or not. Ditto, if he doesn't see his comments. That's all. Nothing about it being OK to say mean things if someone doesn't see them. Nothing about my comments being OK because Somerby doesn't see them. I stand by my comments and I don't care whether he sees them or not.
DeleteI don't owe Somerby anything.
Anonymouse 5:20pm, no, you said that character assassinations is meaningless as long as your target isn’t aware that you’re slandering them.
DeleteAnonymouse 5:00pm, the point is that your insults affect Bob whether he reads them or not. That’s why Digby shut down her comment board, Einstein.
DeleteHow do you imagine anything I say influences Somerby when he doesn't read his comments? ESP?
DeleteDigby shut down her comment board when she took on several additional writers on her blog. I am not Digby and I don't her personally, so I have no idea why she shut down her comments. There were some interesting people up until then and she was winning blogger awards and getting a lot of praise. Given that she also writes for Salon, I suspect she no longer had time to moderate the comments, which is a different reason than you suggest.
Calling someone else "Einstein" in a sarcastic voice does not add a single bit of strength your arguments. Why do it? It just shows the kind of hostility that a blogger might want to avoid in blog comments.
@5:27 That is a complete and total lie. You are attributing to me, what you yourself said. If you go back and look at the comments you will see that I didn't every say that. You did.
DeleteSomerby and Fox are eliding the difference between name-calling and membership in a political organization. Zamdani belongs to the Democratic Socialists of America, an organization with stated goals and programs, active in US politics with chapters in most states and many cities. You can look them up at: https://www.dsausa.org/
ReplyDeleteI'm sure that Zamdani gave full and complete explanations of his ideas during his campaign. NYC is unique in that the residents are familiar with Democratic Socialism in other countries and young enough to welcome change.
Somerby hints that perhaps Zamdani is hiding something, but he does not seem to be, given that his membership and the organization itself are not clandestine.
But when Fox conflates communism, socialism and Obama-ism and attaches those labels indiscriminately to various individuals on the left, mostly Democrats, they are not referring to any organization but calling Dems dirty dogs. These are pejorative terms used to denigrate others without saying anything specific about their beliefs, except that they are bad and unAmerican in some vague way. There is no Dirty Dogs of America organization where you can go and look up their beliefs and activities.
Unless someone belongs to an organization such as The Socialist Party of America, calling them a socialist seems inappropriate. Info about the socialists is here:
https://www.socialistpartyusa.net/
There are clear differences between these parties on the left, which include various others not mentioned by Fox. When the names of such organizations are carelessly conflated with right wing name-calling, they become meaningless, when the active organizing on the left is important to elections (esp for getting out the vote) and to creating an over-arching Democratic party that welcomes many perspectives uniting to defeat right wing assholery.
Because Somerby professes to be liberal and yet spends 24/7 watching Fox News (by his own admission), it is hard to see why he again advances Fox's name-calling without shedding any real light on what Zamdani and other left wing politicians are doing to advance their goals.
Digby has been featuring a freeway sign that evokes considerable response: "Your Life Shouldn't be This Hard!" Zamdani, whatever he has been saying, clearly evoked a strongly postive response by telling people he would seek ways to make New Yorkers' lives easier. That is the essence of what left-wing political approaches described as socialism or communism are about. Helping the working people through shared effort and public funding.
Somerby might have said some of this himself, but he is too busy trying to knock his idea of the left wing press (which is actually legacy or mainstream, corporate media). Given how much he promotes Fox and its hosts, and how routinely he attacks MSNBC and CNN, perhaps Somerby is being paid as an influencer to promote Fox (and with it, the right's agenda, Trump, and the other goons who are guests). It wouldn't be the first time an influencer was paid to promote a product and Fox is definitely a product.
'Somerby hints that perhaps Zamdani is hiding something"
DeleteNope. You don't how to read.
Somerby says:
Delete"Who the Sam Hill is Zohran Mamdani? Because he's now mayor-elect of New York City, inquiring minds may want to know.
One day after he was elected, NPR's Rachel Treisman attempted to puzzle it out."
Why would anyone have to puzzle it out, after the man spent a whole campaign explaining himself to potential voters? If they don't know and Somerby doesn't know, and he implies that Rachel Treisman doesn't know, why don't they?
The implication that he is hiding who he is seems pretty clear to me. All the explanation in the world is not good enough for Somerby, because he is still asking after all of it.
"Who the Sam Hill is Zohran Mamdani? Because he's now mayor-elect of New York City, inquiring minds may want to know."
DeleteThe time to figure this out was before the election, not afterwards.
Mamdani is the guy I liked better every time I watched him speak.
DeleteWho is "Zamdani"?
DeleteWasn't that the name of the character in the Adam Sandler movie?
Delete@3:54 Can't you recognize an obvious typo? Do you have to be a jerk every minute of the day?
DeleteOne advantage to having a nym is that you can edit your comments. When we anonymice make a typo, there’s nothing we can do about it.
DeleteOnce is a typo. Five times in a row is ignorance.
DeleteIt is clearly a mistake and not Mamdani's actual name, but it is no different than when Somerby calls Newsom Newsome, over and over in the same essay. It is not exactly ignorance but misremembering. If it were ignorance, a different name (not one similar) would have been used, as when Trump refers to Azerbaijan as Albania, over and over in different speeches.
DeleteIf Mamdani were here, I would apologize to him, but I'm not going to apologize to a jerk who thinks calling people on obvious mistakes is the way to contribute to a blog discussion. Do you think people consider you smart for knowing another commenter got Mamdani's name wrong?
DeleteGet basic facts right. Maybe people will think you're smart.
Delete"Very few people in Blue America will be aware of how far off the rails the Fox News Channel's major programs have gone."
ReplyDeleteWhy would people in Blue America care? Altruism? Somerby abuses the left here every day. So do Fox viewers. When did abuse become a means of persuasion?
Trump has demonstrated to his followers that laws are optional, lies are normal, and even that speech no longer has to make any sense. Somerby is just documenting the results of this learning as it appears on Fox. But it is everywhere on the right.
ReplyDeleteTiedrich (who uses words well) says today about Trump's moronic statement about magnets and China:
"you know, I’ve been writing about Preznit Fuckwit for years now, and I’ve become pretty fluent in moronspeak — but even I can’t make heads or tails of this burst trashbag of word-adjacent noises."
Exactly! This stuff about communists and Obama is just a pile of moronic word-adjacent noises that Fox hosts use to fill up their time on air. It doesn't have to make any sense, because when you have a president who never makes sense, why should anyone else do so?
I’m a Stalinist. I’d like to send deplorables to the Gulag.
ReplyDeleteThis really isn't funny.
DeleteTrump is sending those he considers deplorable to gulags in other countries. You don't have to be a Stalinist to be a bad person.
Delete
DeleteHow's sending deplorables to the Gulag to be de-programmed makes someone a "bad person"? Are you saying Hillary Clinton is a bad person?
@1:45 Don't try to think. You'll only hurt your head.
Delete@1:45 was bain dramaged a long time ago @1:56.
DeleteTriggered, Hillary?
DeleteHa! Never heard that one before. Clever.
DeleteCan you explain yourself 1:45?, I have no idea what the fuck you are alluding to.
DeleteI would like to announce that once I receive my $2,000 tariff refund check, I will use those funds to give $25,000 to each and every TDH commenter.
ReplyDeleteI will then take whatever is remaining from the $2,000 and use it to start blowing up Venezuelan speedboats that I’m kinda sure are smuggling cocaine. Each blown-up boat will result in 280 million American lives saved (all math vetted by the White House).
Don’t thank me. Thank President Trump.
They are smuggling fentanyl, which primarily comes from China.
DeleteNo, Fentenyl comes across the Mexican border, smuggled by Americans. The Venezuelans are smuggling cocaine to the Caribbean, not the US.
DeleteI used to bring the cocaine in up my ass until a big juicy fart blew it out.
DeleteThanks for humanizing what can sometimes be a dry, too-abstract subject.
DeleteGuide to meanings of words for right wingers:
ReplyDeletecommunist = bad person
socialist = bad person
Obama = bad person
Democrat = bad person
Biden = bad person
Hillary = extra super bad person
With very stupid, uneducated people, getting more specific than that can confuse them and lead to too much thinking, which is bad. Here is the level our president functions at, cognitively (from Tiedrich today):
"Preznit Fuckwit is an imbecile who doesn’t know shit about shit.
Donny’s befuddled by the power switch on a computer. wrap your head around that. back in March, Laura Ingraham asked him what field his college-bound son Barron might go into. Donny’s answer went straight into the Dumbfuck Hall of Fame.
“maybe technology. he can look at a computer. I’m trying, turning off his computer, I turn it off, I turn it off, his laptop, I said ‘oh good now,’ and I go back five minutes later, he’s got his laptop. I say, ‘how did you did that?’ ‘none of your business, dad.’ he’s got an unbelievable aptitude in technology.”
*blinks in astonishment*
holy shit, President What’s The Deal With Magnets got outwitted by an on-off switch."
Trump followers consider this kind of talk to be permission to be as stupid as they want too. They don't need to think about what a communist is, as long as they know it is bad to be one. This is why they are so easy to fool, so gullible about buying merchandise that doesn't even work, so willing to excuse every bit of wrongdoing, up to and including child rape, starving the poor, and killing people in boats then making up stories about their crimes afterwards, which is pretty much like kidnapping people off the streets and claiming they were dangerous afterwards.
Stupid people become right wingers, because they either do not see the stupidity and evil in their leaders, or they don't care about it. Then they whine and cry when someone points out how stupid they are.
Somerby luvs to point out the stupidity, but he respects the feelings of the right wing he serves by blaming the left for the stupid shit. The New York Times never talks about the Fox stupidity, so it is obvious Blue America's fault, Somerby says, and all the right wingers nod along with him, yes yes, it is their fault they say in chorus.
Well said and spot on.
Delete"he (Somerby) respects the feelings of the right wing he serves by blaming the left for the stupid shit."
ReplyDeleteAnother example-free accusation.
Here is one of today's examples of the blaming the left for the right's crud:
Delete"Very few people in Blue America will be aware of how far off the rails the Fox News Channel's major programs have gone. That's because no major journalist or news org in Blue America reports and discusses the contents of this channel's actual fare.
For whatever reason, the contents of this channel's programs have been disappeared by Blue America's academics and journalists. Campos-Duffy goes unreported and undiscussed. So does the very strange Gutfeld."
Nope. Swing and a miss.
DeleteThe example you gave is of Somerby lamenting how Blue America is unaware of how far off the rails Fox News is.
'Blaming the left' and saying the left is 'unaware' are two very different things.
You don’t know Somerby. What is the point of the left knowing about Fox if we blues aren’t responsible for doing something? Previously Somerby has said, repeatedly, that we Blues put Trump in office by not understanding the right, yada yada. As if we blues would change who we are if we just knew how the left sees us.
Delete"Previously Somerby has said, repeatedly, that we Blues put Trump in office by not understanding the right, yada yada. As if we blues would change who we are if we just knew how the left (sic) sees us."
DeleteStrike Three. You're out!
Somerby recommends we understand the right for the same reason a good attorney should understand both sides of the argument. So you can be more effective in making your case.
Not so we can 'change who we are.'
You are putting words in Somerby's mouth that he didn't say. Another Somerby whisperer, who is sure he knows what Somerby meant, even if he didn't say it.
DeleteIt would be corrupt to focus-group the right wing in order to create political messages that would appeal to them and sway them to vote Democratic (not that such a thing would be possible). It would also be deceptive in the ways that some here are suggesting politicians already are. A lawyer's job is to represent a client. A politician's job is to represent the people, all of them. That means doing what will benefit them, whether the voters know what that is or not. Telling people what they want to hear in order to get elected is corrupt, dishonest, self-serving, not what a politician is expected to do in office. It is what George Santos does.
I doubt that is what Somerby wants Dems to do. Somerby isn't clear about what is wrong with Dems, but his clear shift from the left to the right after Trump came on the scene, his increasing bigotry, suggests you do not have any idea what's in his head when he attacks blue America.
No, Somerby recommends that Dems capitulate to Republicans, ostensibly because when people like Republicans do not get their way they become extreme and can harm society. He wants us to "all get along", and is unconcerned about losing one's principles or integrity and the resulting impact of that circumstance.
DeleteSomerby does not "understand the right"; he does find many of the views of the right to be valid, and having even the mildest familiarity with discerning via inference, Somerby plainly holds racist, sexist, and xenophobic views that align well with Republicans.
My 4:42 above is in response to 4:03, not 4:33.
Delete4:33 makes decent points.
"Somerby plainly holds racist, sexist, and xenophobic views that align well with Republicans."
DeletePlainly. Except you can't provide a single quote to support that sentence. Plainly.
uh…it’s a politician’s job to convince/persuade people. That doesn’t involve throwing away all your principles, dope.
DeleteActually, if anonymouse 3:04pm was able to comprehend the logic of “know thy enemy” (conservatives) or “the art of persuasion” (appeal to as many voters as you can because there are many people who can be persuaded) she would be correct in arguing that it would be a change from who she is now. Boy howdy.
@5:21, Plenty of such examples have been provided before. You can look up examples yourself. I suggest search on Roy Moore, Brock Turner or Stormy Daniels to find sexist examples.
DeleteSomerby has never suggested that Dems should get to know The Other better or watch more Fox News in order to gain votes. He thinks the left is elitist, snobbish, looks down on The Other, is too woke and shouldn't call anyone sexist or racist (even if they are, which he doesn't admit), and calls the left self-satisfied and arrogant. I suspect he has a chip on his shoulder.
DeleteAnonymouse 5:31pm, you are correct. What Bob has said is that Fox News and others should be challenged when they say things that are incorrect and they should also be challenged by an opposing political viewpoint.
DeleteFor most of us, the term "The Disappeared" refers to people kidnapped and hidden in prison by an oppressive government. Here, it is unclear what Somerby is referring to, but it seems to be referring to what happens on Gutfeld's show (etc.) and the way the mainstream news doesn't report on it -- the right wing media content is being disappeared.
ReplyDeleteIt seems likely Somerby simply grabbed the term disappeared because he feels that the media is ignoring something he thinks is important to report, but when he ignores the political meaning of the term and its emotionally loaded content, he trivializes what is happening to people being disappeared in our society by Trump, and he also disrespects the trauma of those who lost relatives in Argentina, where the term originated.
This makes Somerby's use of the term today offensive to those of us familiar with these other events. ICE is disappearing people off the streets daily, without due process and without concern about whether they have identified the right people, without informing families or employers or schools, and leaving dogs, crashed cars, bags and groceries, even young children behind in their wake. The disappeared are moved around so that lawyers and families, even courts, cannot find them. And they are mistreated in prison, some have died. This is serious and not the triviality of ignoring Greg Gutfeld. Somerby should know better than to do this. The tragedies of Argentina are worse in the sense that there were no courts to appeal to, and the people taken were never returned. Families are still protesting their disappearance many decades later.
This is callous behavior on Somerby's part, of the type that we might expect from a right winger, given that lack of empathy is a hallmark of the right. Gutfeld's mockery is equivalent to Somerby's borrowing of phrases that have emotional meaning for others, even if he himself does not care about what is happening on American streets under Trump's regime.
"but when he (Somerby) ignores the political meaning of the term (the disappeared) and its emotionally loaded content, he trivializes what is happening to people being disappeared in our society by Trump"
DeleteOnly a worry-wart like you would think that.
Or maybe someone who is related to a person kidnapped by ICE? Or someone who is an immigrant worried about being disappeared? Or someone who cares about what happens to other people?
DeleteAny politician who departs from the required effusive worship of capitalism and its god-like rulers and the expectation that the rich should own and run everything will be branded with smear words like un-American or communist. Fox is the megaphone for the plutocratic cult, so of course they're going to do it. The plutocratic cult believes the country and its government exist solely to fuel and protect their wealth. They are terrified that Americans will get effective public services, as countries in Europe and many other nations have. They hate the prospect that people will get the idea that society, the economy, and the government should work for the benefit of ordinary people, not just the rich.
ReplyDeleteJohn D Rockefeller Sr was a great man.
DeleteDo you feel the same way about Elon Musk?
Delete