DEMOCRATIZATION'S REMAINS: Podcasters of the world, unite!

FRIDAY, MAY 29, 2026

Democratization's spawn: Why do certified experts insist that our nation already qualifies as a classic failed state?   

Look at what remains of the discourse, these experts all sayand sure enough! Last night, the assault on the possibilities of the American project was present again, for all to see, on the second most-watched "cable news" program within the American firmament.

Talarico was being baited again. The Times was averting its gaze:

Stephen Miller Goes All In On Schoolyard Talarico Taunts: ‘Less Testosterone Than Jasmine Crockett’   

Stephen Miller went all in on taunting Texas state Rep. James Talarico on Thursday, telling Jesse Watters that when the Senate candidate gets his blood drawn, “soy milk comes out.”

Miller joined Jesse Watters Primetime to discuss the still unresolved conflict with Iran, before moving to a favored topic for both men–attacking Talarico’s masculinity. The top advisor to President Donald Trump tweeted on Wednesday that Talarico was the “first transgender Senate candidate” – a post that made headlines after the official DNC account replied by calling him an “ugly f*ck.” Miller repeated the line to Watters on Thursday, before launching into a long, insult-laden rant against Talarico.

“Well, first of all, I think it’s very bold, one could say brave, courageous, that the Democratic Party would choose Texas of all places to nominate their first transgender Senate candidate,” he said. 

Willa Pope Robbins was on the scene again, reporting for Mediaite. (videotape included), Believe it or not, the transcript runs like this:    

WATTERS (5/28/26): Could we see another historical defeat in Texas? Because the Democrats have nominated James Talarico, who to me just screams "Texas."

MILLER: Well, first of all, I think it’s very bold, one could say brave, courageous, that the Democratic Party would choose Texas of all places to nominate their first transgender Senate candidate.

He’s clearly transitioning into a female. You know, when Talarico goes in for a blood test, when he gets a physical, blood doesn’t come out; instead, soy milk comes out. This man has less testosterone than Jasmine Crockett. 

It is a mind-boggling choice. They would choose a person to run for that office who looks like he doesn’t belong in the Senate but in a cabaret show. Look, at the end of the day, I have a hard time believing that the people of Texas, some of the toughest, roughest, strongest men and women, the pioneer heritage, the frontier history, from the Mexican American war, through the Alamo and everything else, are going to choose somebody with that much soy to be a U.S. senator compared to a real conservative patriotic, God-fearing and truly be loved statewide figure in Ken Paxton.  

WATTERS: They should have nominated Crockett!...God bless him, as they say down there. More UFO files straight ahead.   

(For the slightly fuller videotape, you can start clicking here.)

So it went, with UFO files coming next, as millions of American citizens watched from locations within our failed state.   

No, Virginia! James Talarico isn't transgender, nor is he "transitioning into a female." (Elsewhere, some people are.) Also, there have been no published reports of soy milk in his veins. 

Regarding the question of Texas heritage, the hopeful has said that's he's eighth generation; we've seen no one dispute that claim. Other Texans have elected him to the Texas legislature, where he has served four terms. 

In that transcript, you're looking at the latest swill from the garbage can Suzanne Scott pries open each night at Fox. In fairness, Watters didn't make the mistake this time of openly saying "gay." 

As we noted yesterday, he had done so the previous day; it was part of the latest ugly clown show performed by him on The Five. That had been a bit of a rookie mistake, but also a mistake born of ardor.  

Experts say that a modern nation which tolerates this is, in fact, a failed stateand there was a time, not long ago, when swill like this would never have been seen or heard on a nationwide "news" broadcast. 

Those days are long gone, the certified experts all say. They say this low-IQ garbage is with us for good. It's the fruit of democratization. 

Not long ago, people like Watters and Miller had to seek each other out in furtive fashion. But then, the democratization, along with the rich, did come into our lives. 

Talk radio came, and the Internet came, and 24-hour cable news went demonically partisan. After that, social media came, and before long the crowning blow:

Before long, the podcasters came! The rise of these new platforms created the world described by this new bromide:   

Every gay-baiter a king!

These people could find each other with great ease now; they could congregate in large numbers. At the Fox News Channel, ownership hired as many of these people as they could. 

As a result, we the people can now hear gay-baiting, and trans-baiting, along with ugly insults directed at women, pretty much whenever we please.  

A new subgroup had been formed. An earlier type of discourse is gone, but various subgroups remain.

Democratization let this world emerge. Helen Lewis explores this new world in her lengthy cover report for the June edition of the Atlantic.   

Lewis may be our most instructive current writer. Inevitably, she lives across the pond.  

Yesterday, we linked you to her current essay. As we noted, it carries this dual headline, and her text begins as shown:  

THE MEN WHO WANT WOMEN TO BE QUIET 
A virulent form of misogyny has become the single most important force holding together the American right.  

Douglas Wilson has a modest proposal to improve American life: He wants to repeal the Nineteenth Amendment, which gave women the vote. In his ideal system, “we would do it in our politics the same way we do it in our church structure,” he told me recently. “And that is, we vote by household.”

Wilson is a co-founder of the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches, based in Moscow, Idaho. Over the past five decades, he has built a small empire there, dedicated to disseminating his theocratic vision for the United States: a publishing house, a school, a liberal-arts college, and a video-streaming service. His denomination, which has about 170 affiliated churches, counts Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth as a member, and Wilson was invited to lead a prayer service at the Pentagon in February. So when the pastor casually suggests disenfranchising half of America, people listen.

Douglas Wilson is more a pastor than a podcaster, but he does have a video-streaming service. He's connected to Pete Hegseth, and he doesn't want women to vote.

Wilson is entitled to his viewsand as we've noted, matters of sexuality and gender have always been hard. When Moses descended from the mountain, his tablets didn't describe the perfect way to structure relation between men- and women-folk.  

It's too bad that he didn't! As we noted yesterday, European literature begins with the Iliad, a war poem built around the belief of its principal characters that society should be built around male subjugation of women. That includes the subjugation of Helen, radiance of woman, and the subjugation of the kidnapped daughter of the local priest to Apollo:

                                  "Never again, old man,
let me catch sight of you by the hollow ships!
Not loitering now, not slinking back tomorrow.
The staff and the wreaths of god will never save you then.
The girl? I won't give up the girl. Long before that,
old age will overtake her in my house,
in Argos,
far from her fatherland. slaving back and forth
at the loom, forced to share my bed!

So said the furious Agamemnon, the furious lord of men. 

Years later, Lewis is exploring the attitudes displayed by Agamemnon's heirs. She started with the Pastor Wilson, but soon she began to cite the furious podcasters who now people the land.

As with the troops under Agamemnon, the roll call of these furious fellows goes on and on and on. Before long, Lewis reports what Pastor Wilson says on his website, and she also states the name of the movement she is exploring:

[There is a] twinkly, avuncular Douglas Wilson, the guy who joined a hippie congregation fresh out of the Navy because he liked to play guitar...

But the 72-year-old shows a different side on his website, Blog & Mablog. For more than two decades, Wilson has been airing piquant opinions on unruly women—or, as he calls them, “small-breasted biddies,” “harridans,” “lumberjack dykes,” and “Jezebels.” He once referred to Gloria Steinem and another feminist as “a couple of cunts.” And this is the polite version. Every year he celebrates “No Quarter November,” when he promises to tell readers what he really thinks.  

[...] 

Wilson is a prominent voice in what is sometimes called “masculinism”: a movement to fight back against the advances of feminism and reassert the primacy of men. 

Podcasters and streamers and websites oh my! Lewis quotes one podcaster after another as she describes the reach of this throwback subgroupa subgroup which was able to form in the way it has thanks to democratization.

There is, of course, no way to prove that the views and beliefs of any of these "masculinists" is somehow actually "wrong." As for Lewis, who is very bright, she is bright enough, and decent enough, to mention an accurate point;
Like most popular movements, masculinism has many entry points, and both defensible and alarming forms. At one end of the spectrum are legitimate concerns about male loneliness, the declining share of men in higher education, stagnant wages for non-college-educated men, and the deadening effects of day-trading, gaming, and porn. At the other end of masculinism are a misogynist vocabulary about AWFULs and the longhouse (terms that we’ll come back to) and a political agenda close to that in The Handmaid’s Tale, whereby women are denied the right to work, vote, and control their own bodies.  
Respectable concerns are floating around inside this movement, Lewis is willing to say. (More on that next week.) 

But then she turns back to (for example) the "misogynist vocabulary about AWFULs"braindead language the brain-damaged dumbbells of Fox were yukking it up with only a few months back.

As Lewis explains at a later point, AWFULs are Affluent White Female Urban Liberals, a point which Gutfeld and Watters did in fact find amusing. And with that, we finally reach our one point of complaint:

In her essay, Lewis cites a wide array of masculinist streamers and podcasters, not excluding some women. She never mentions the grisly, abundantly braindead subgroup members who have been hired to play this way on the ersatz "cable news" shows of the ersatz Fox News Channel.

To a remarkable extent, Greg Gutfeld has dropped his former nightly practice of comparing the women of The View to horses, cattle, pig and cows, but also to whales and "livestock." (This certified idiot finds Joy Beharshe's 83perhaps a bit too portly.)

That said, this strange man can't seem to quit the practice of insulting women in the ugliest ways possible. For his part, Watters seems to be a genuine nutcase when it comes to his incessant list of rules about what men should and shouldn't be allowed to do.

(Real men don't lick ice cream cones, Real men don't drink from straws.)

They also like to bash and bait people who are trans or gay. They like to bait people as gay even if such people actually aren't. This is all part of an ancient pattern, in which sexuality and gender have always been challenginghard.

As this conduct continues on Fox, the New York Times averts its gazerefuses to report the fact that this surprising journalistic behavior is taking place. As a general matter, the Atlantic is silent tooand even Lewis failed to mention the furious heirs to Agamemnon who patrol the nation's most-watched "cable news" programs for three solid hours each weekday night.

Agamemnon swore that he wouldn't surrender the girl. The rise of the movement Lewis describes suggests that these attitudes are deeply bred in the bone.

Some of these fellows may simply be wired in such a way that these reactions can't be stopped from surging up into their undersized heads. But these reactions are widespread, and a mutt like Gutfeldthe guy is 61 years old!teaches young men, on a nightly basis, that this is the way they should see the world and that this is the way they should play.

You can take them off the plains outside Troy but you can't get the furies to leave them. They want to be in charge of the girls. We'll guess that, in large part, they're simply wired that way.

The democratization of media has let them find other angry men who are so inclined. They're no longer on the plains near Troy, but that blood still runs through their veins.

Gutfeld insults women every night. The New York Times refuses to report this surprising fact, along with the fact that he and Watters very much like to slime decent people and very much like to bait gays.

Cronkite and Brinkley are long gone. Brought off the bench by democratization, Watters and Gutfeld remain.
 

43 comments:

  1. "Why do certified experts insist that our nation already qualifies as a classic failed state?"

    Why does Somerby assert this without citing a single "certified" expert?

    Trump is still a threat. He hasn't taken over yet. We still have a Constitution, a Supreme Court, a Congress. Recall that Hitler disbanded his when he proclaimed himself dictator. Trump hasn't done that and I doubt we would tolerate it if he did -- given his current state of ill health. On what basis does Somerby call us a failed state?

    Given that Somerby will not examine Trump's actions and confines his criticism to saying that Trump is crazy, and Somerby will not urge any act of resistance, not even marching or funding Democratic candidates, Somerby appears to be condoning and furthering Trump's agenda by calling him a "wild and crazy guy" in the same way that SNL glorified those Dan Aykroyd and Steve Martin characters funning around in their bright colored shirts. It is all harmless nonsense according to Somerby, but our state is failed because the mainstream press will not call Trump crazy the way Somerby and his gal pal Mary Trump do.

    As usual, Somerby's essay today is useless.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. WTF? Trump stacked the USSC with loons who ruled he can do any fucking illegal thing he wants, and his Republican Congressional advantage let's him do anything he wants. Illegal tariffs, AOK, illegal warring, AOK, stealing billions in plain sight, AOK, ruining our international reputation, AOK, etc.. The fucking DOJ is run by his (former) personal lawyer and he is actively attacking his perceived enemies thru lawfare. His goons have shredded Government institutions and stolen all our digital information. He has stolen voter rolls and let us know there will be soldiers at the ballot box, and your mail in ballots will be fucked with by the USPS. And they gave him $200 Billion for his brown shirt army that can murder you without any consequences. I could go on, but no worries, nothing to see over here but the plutocrats Project 2025 going swimmingly well to end democracy.

      Delete
  2. "They want to be in charge of the girls. We'll guess that, in large part, they're simply wired that way."

    When Somerby speaks like this about misogyny, he places himself firmly in the ranks of the men he refers to as "they." And no, this is not a matter of wiring. It is part of the culture wars. Culture is created, invented, not innate. We know this because it varies so widely across place and time. Calling one's preferred views "wiring" is lazy self-justification that ignores others. It is how racism was created too -- to justify owning other people and forcing them to submit to atrocities. Men who think this way are dangerous, including Somerby.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hear! Hea!

      I was pretty fucking awful to women in my youth (12-14 - pretty much Beavis), but I learned to be way better out of consideration for them, and to create a so far 45 year union with my wife. I also worked at being considerate at work, admonishing other men who called them gals, or barked loudly how hot Alice is. Being a shithead towards women is not embedded in mens DNA. It is taught. What happened to men being taught to be considerate and kind. What the fuck is wrong with the old male chauvinist pig Somerby anyway? He's coming off as that old creepy guy. You don't want to be that guy.

      Delete
    2. Normal, formally educated and less educated folk alike laugh together when the liberal brainwashed try to suggest male domination of women is "cultural." It must be hell to exist so far outside of reality.

      Delete
    3. Men who try that shit on women in the military or police find out quickly how wired domination of women is. The idea that misbehavior is hardwired and thus privileged to men is wrong whenever women obtain the means to fight back. Men with these attitudes similarly justify bullying as a natural part of their right to dominate others, until they meet someone bigger, then they object that their natural order is being usurped. Men in the military respect rank not size when it comes to who they obey.

      Delete
    4. If you consider our cultural views about male domination of women to be so far outside your reality, you may wind up in a prison cell.

      Delete
    5. Do explain 5:53. You make no sense.

      Delete
    6. "the liberal brainwashed try to suggest male domination of women is "cultural." Says the cuck who can't find a woman to date him.

      Delete
    7. If a man thinks he can do whatever he wants to women because boys will be boys and he is just hardwired that way and culture can never change that, he is going to do things that break the law and he will be convicted and put in jail for those things. Women vote now, which means they serve on juries and elect DAs and can (and do) make a fuss when rapists are not charged or are acquitted or given too lenient sentences. That is what happened to the judge who let Brock Turner off with a too short sentence -- he was recalled by the voters.

      Guys who think it is just part of their reality to knock women around when they get uppity, are going to have prison sentences because going to jail for violence against women is part of our modern nation's justice system, even in the retarded South.

      Delete
    8. Women are rejecting right wing men on dating websites. Specifying no MAGA is part of dating "culture" these days because what self-respecting woman wants to be with a man who thinks a penis means he gets to dominate her?

      Delete
  3. "Gutfeld insults women every night."

    Somerby does this too. He insults women every time he tries to discuss women's issues or specific womens' actions. He has no clue about women because of his own upbringing and choices as an adult man.

    It is in fact an insult to think that women care whether a cretin like Gutfeld calls Behar a whale or cow when there are serious injustices and abuses that need attention to be fixed. Examples: abortion rights and other women's health issues, including contraception and inclusion in medical research; affordable child care, co-parenting and shared home maintenance so that women can participate fully in society via jobs and other activities; equal pay and equal access to promotion and all job categories in the workplace instead of confinement to pink ghettos and lower paying dead-end work; investigation and prosecution of domestic violence, rape, assault and other crimes against women; restoration of women to the positions they earned in the military and other govt jobs; pensions for domestic workers and home care health workers; recognition of exploitation of women in films; return of DEI and an end to belitting or erasure of the accomplishments of women.

    Women want real restoration of their advances and progress toward their long-standing goals in society. They do not need Somerby's distorted idea of chivalric defense against the name-calling of women who are obvious successes by virtue of hosting a long-running, highly rated talk show.

    Gutfeld's show is aimed at men while The View is aimed at women, appearing in a daytime TV timeslot, where it is #1. Women don't watch and don't care about Gutfeld. He is performatively attacking women in order to gratify men in his audience. His verbal attacks on women simulate the very real physical and sexual attacks women experience in real life. Those matter. Gutfeld's attacks are symbolic, come across loud and clear to men and demonstrate the approval of male violence implicitly signaled by Trump himself and the right wing in general. Somerby does not make that connection. He thinks the words are the problem because women are delicate flowers who must be protected from men's strong speech, when it is the violence that is the problem for women. Somerby routinely takes the side of men accused of violence, not the women reporting it, as when he defended convicted rapist Brock Turner and accused pedophile Roy Moore. Somerby has never spoken out about releasing the Epstein files and prosecuting the perpetrators of the heinous crimes that are Epstein's legacy, despite Trump's obvious complicity and ongoing coverup.

    When Somerby wants to get serious about women's issues, he will stop promoting Gutfeld's show and stop the oblique references to fake socio-biological justifications of male abuse he thinks are described by Homer. Homer was apparently the Gutfeld of his time, not someone who empathized with any female character in his narratives.

    ReplyDelete
  4. hus Sayeth Our Gracious Host:

    As this conduct continues on Fox, the New York Times averts its gaze—refuses to report the fact that this surprising journalistic behavior is taking place. As a general matter, the Atlantic is silent too—and even Lewis failed to mention the furious heirs to Agamemnon who patrol the nation's most-watched "cable news" programs for three solid hours each weekday night.

    Agamemnon swore that he wouldn't surrender the girl. The rise of the movement Lewis describes suggests that these attitudes are deeply bred in the bone.

    Some of these fellows may simply be wired in such a way that these reactions can't be stopped from surging up into their undersized heads. But these reactions are widespread, and a mutt like Gutfeld—the guy is 61 years old!—teaches young men, on a nightly basis, that this is the way they should see the world and that this is the way they should play.

    A possible explanation for why The Atlantic and The Times do not pay attention to Gutfield's and his minions' nightly emissions of misogyny, homophobia, and transphobia is that they are not as influential among "young men," as Somerby asserts. Looking at weekly ratings [1] for Gutfeld!, only 292,000 viewers aged 18-49 watched the show, using the highest weekly viewer ratings currently published. To me (and all my analysts at my sprawling campus), that does not seem very high, especially in an age where “democratized media,” as Our Gracious Host describes it, has audio and video podcasts that get into the millions of downloads and viewers per episode, and definitely skew towards the “young men” demographic. It would also seem to me that it would be a stretch to call men who watch Gutfeld! form the ages of 35-49 "young men," but, again, that's just me. It seems to me, that the audience that watches Gutfeld! is not very young, and probably like most of Fox New's audience skews very old, in the age bracket that encompasses Our Gracious Host. Will Our Gracious Host take that into consideration when he repeats again and again, the same article complaining about why The Times and The Atlantic do not obsess over Gutfeld!?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I will also point out a couple of other things:

      Mr. Gutfeld once made his "bones" running a magazine called "Stuff" and later "Maxim," which catered to the "lad" demographic some twenty years ago. Twenty years ago, the "lad" demographic could have been considered synonymous with "young men," but that was twenty years ago. I would be surprised if any "young men" would remember such magazines, or, even what a magazine is. It would seem much more likely that they would be influenced by someone like Dave Portnoy of Barstool Sports, who seems like they play the role that a Gutfeld would have had some twenty years ago.

      My final point will be that cable news has largely fallen away as something that people influences people's thinking, or, drives media narratives. That has largely moved on to such "democratized" media such as podcasts, live streams, social media as Our Gracious Host puts it, even though there is very little democratization that has occurred there. When I interact with "young men" in my daily life, they never speak about cable news as something they watch, only podcasts, live streams, and social media. I really wonder if Our Gracious Host has processed this fact in his life, if he ever really interacts with "young men" at any point during his day, of, if he just interacts with people at the Bagel Shop, as he used to describe back in the day, or, with fellow elderly people who must populate the doctors' rooms during the many medical excursions that populate his calendar these days.

      A perfect example of the decline of the influence of cables news like Fox News as an influence is Tucker Carlson. Tucker may have been the most influential person in cable news before his firing. When he was fired, I thought Tucker would decline in his influence on the Right; however, the opposite happened: his influence has increased even more with his podcast only approach. In this vein, it makes sense that the Times recently did a high profile interview with Tucker Carlson, and not Greg Gutfeld.

      As an aside, there is not much “democratized” about the alleged “democratized media” that Our Gracious Host bangs on about almost daily. For example, many “democratized media” outlets and personalities are very heavily subsidized early in their histories by wealthy rightwing donors and foundations; The Daily Wire run by former pundit wunderkind Ben Shapiro is most notorious example. Please watch this [2] brief video for more information.

      Make no mistake: I fully think that the disgusting misogyny, homophobia, and transphobia daily broadcast on Fox News should be documented by such legacy media as the Times and The Atlantic, but I think they largely don't because Fox News isn't as influential as it once was, and certainly isn't very influential among "young men."

      1 https://ustvdb.com/networks/fox-news/shows/gutfeld/

      2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6US0FP_Xklo

      Delete
    2. Well, I enjoyed Bob’s essay. I suspect you may not have had a launching point for your post if he had simply omitted the word “young” from the sentence you focus on.

      I myself don’t watch Fox news, so I appreciate the window Bob provides on what is broadcast every night. It must require amazing strength of will to do so, because what they say is really quite remarkable, meaning unbelievably retrograde, and worthy of outrage.

      If 3 million+ people view this shit (not a small number for broadcast “news”), I don’t think age really matters, and it could be argued that 292,000 “young men” is a pretty substantial number.

      It would be legitimate for news for legacy outlets like the Times to report on Stephen Miller’s appearance on Fox, especially given the rancorous nature of the things he said. As far as I know, they haven’t, but I may have overlooked something. When baleful Trumpian mandarins are given air time to spew their crap, it should be reported widely.

      Leroy

      Delete
    3. Sorry for the poor editing. Also, kinda nice to see old names pop up on this site.

      Leroy

      Delete
    4. I heard about Miller from several different sources today and I never touch the fucking NY Times.

      Delete
    5. @4:06

      I've not seen these sources you speak of. And the NYT is interesting, because you get to see what an infuential source is reporting about current affairs and compare them with other sources. It can be quite revealing. Kinda like what Bob does.

      Plus, the Times does print stuff that’s worth reading, even though their rightward drift in the opinion section has been ongoing for some time now.

      Leroy

      Delete
    6. Majority Report with Sam Seder today; John Fugelsang on Sirius last night.

      I’m waiting for the Times to get to the bottom of whitewater, intrepid reporting that they do

      Delete
    7. And who can forget the great reporting the times did leading up to the 2016 election. Her emails and I credible reporting on the Clinton uranium mines without which we may never have known the great Trump years

      Delete
    8. I got into the uranium mine story weeds. What a complete pile of manufactured bullshit to attack Hillary, as usual, while the lifelong pig and crook gets a fucking pass on everything.

      Delete
  5. Talarico did say God is nonbinary. https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/james-talarico-god-nonbinary-bible/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your own article states: "Most Christian traditions adhere to the theological belief that God, the Creator, is genderless—also, not actually a created, anatomically correct human person."

      Delete
    2. Quaker in a BasementMay 29, 2026 at 2:17 PM

      What do you think, David? Does God have a gender?

      Delete
    3. We can't describe the gender of the incomprehensible; we can say David in Cal is stupid as fuck. What the fuck is Talarico's policies you object to you fucking creep? Name me one good thing about Paxton's legion of human sickness. Talarico is a fine man Paxton is an odious creep. This is all you got? Fucking gender?You a fucking weirdo David.

      Delete
    4. If you believe in an imaginary being, does it have a gender? It's another take on: does a tree falling in a forest makes a sound when no one listens.

      Delete
    5. Another take, David: how can we miss you when you won't go away?

      Delete
    6. Christianity is the only Abrahamic religion not constrained by the edict against graven idols.

      And we do it good - male, blue-eyed, blond, and aching to save you.

      Leroy

      Delete
    7. Assume you are talking about our exalted Lord & Savior, Don the Con J. Trump, the Lessor, Leroy?

      Delete
    8. 4:21

      Please, assume nothing. Especially that.

      Leroy

      Delete
    9. Dickhead, the Jewish Zionist atheist Christian Nationalist chimes in on the proper gender of God. You can’t make this stuff up

      Delete
    10. Quaker - I don't believe in God. I quoted that comment because it might impact some Texas voters.

      Delete
    11. Fuck you David. You quoted that comment because you are an awful person. You know it was a nonsensical nasty bullshit comment, but you just had to do it for reasons. Feckless asshole cult member David.

      Delete
    12. David could have commented on Paxton's endless evil, but he just had to repeat the bullshit about Talarico?

      Delete
    13. If David's God does not exist, why did God make him so fucking nasty?

      Delete
    14. Talarico is bi. Faggot and homo.

      Delete
    15. You should know since you like it up your ass.

      Delete
  6. "Democratization's spawn: Why do certified experts insist that our nation already qualifies as a classic failed state?"

    Edmund Burke laughs.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I’m sorry he is not entitled to his views. Certain views are unacceptable and that’s one of them. Always with the qualifiers. That one was unnecessary and quite frankly wrong. He is not entitled to that view.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "This is all part of an ancient pattern, in which sexuality and gender have always been challenging—hard."

    Somerby should read some books about what marriage and relationships were like even a few hundred years ago, or in medieval times, or in biblical times. Marriages were arranged by parents. Men who didn't support their families and children were punished by the church and the community. Men who committed crimes against women (rape, assault) were murdered in extralegal justice by the woman's family.

    This idea that real men used to be allowed to rape and take whatever women they wanted is bunk. The Bible contains any number of strict laws about who could do what with which women. God had rules governing women and men's behavior. These are even stricter in orthodox Jewish and traditional religious communities. Today's rules governing interactions between men and women rely on self-control not community control, reflecting the greater emphasis on psychological understanding of behavior in a much more free culture enabled by our current practices of education and policing.

    If Somerby yearns to return to old times where licentious behavior is thought to be hard-wired into men, he will get the strict and invasive governance of sexuality that went with such attitudes. Chaperones, chastity belts, no sex without a marital commitment including financial settlement on the woman, lack of privacy for the poor and middle classes, church control over every aspect of one's life from work to religious observance, with no play and no tolerance of drunken misbehavior (like Hegseth and Patel display). That is what the old times were like.

    Those who could not control themselves sexually in the old days were much more harshly treated than Epstein and Trump, wealth or not. Ascribing bad behavior to the devil meant that someone under Satan's influence could be put to death in order to purge a community of evil. We can go back to those times, Somerby, so be careful what you wish for.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Pam Bondi was not under oath and refused to answer questions about Trump and Epstein

    Because fuck you. What are you going to do about it

    ReplyDelete
  10. "That said, this strange man can't seem to quit the practice of insulting women in the ugliest ways possible. "

    The ugliest way possible to insult a woman is to pay her less than a man for the same work.

    ReplyDelete