We're puzzled because Anne Applebaum's puzzled!

WEDNESDAY, JULY 24, 2024

Applebaum listens to Trump: Anne Applebaum gives voice to the germ of a highly valid point in a recent essay for The Atlantic.

Her essay appears beneath the headlines shown below. The headlines do a decent job of stating her basic thesis:

Suddenly Trump Looks Older and More Deranged
Now the Republicans are the ones saddled with a candidate who can’t make a clear argument or finish a sentence.

It's true! President Biden's apparent decline was relatively easy to peg as some form of "dementia" or "senility"—more generally, as some familiar form of cognitive decline, of a type which often comes with advanced age.

Now that President Biden is out of the race, Candidate Trump is the candidate who's very old by historical standards. Also, he may perhaps seem to be "deranged," though his form of mental disorder has always seemed to be harder for mainstream journalists to name or report or describe.

What explains the crazy statements and crazy proposals Trump is inclined to make? On Monday, July 1, the New York Times reported the latest episode, one which struck us as remarkable:

Trump Amplifies Calls to Jail Top Elected Officials, Invokes Military Tribunals

Former President Donald J. Trump over the weekend escalated his vows to prosecute his political opponents, circulating posts on his social media website invoking “televised military tribunals” and calling for the jailing of President Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, Senators Mitch McConnell and Chuck Schumer and former Vice President Mike Pence, among other high-profile politicians.

Mr. Trump, using his account on Truth Social on Sunday, promoted two posts from other users of the site that called for the jailing of his perceived political enemies.

One post that he circulated on Sunday singled out Liz Cheney, the former Wyoming congresswoman who is a Republican critic of Mr. Trump’s, and called for her to be prosecuted by a type of military court reserved for enemy combatants and war criminals.

“Elizabeth Lynne Cheney is guilty of treason,” the post said. “Retruth if you want televised military tribunals.”

Really? As president, Trump would want a televised military tribunal for Lynne Cheney? He had now "called for her to be prosecuted by a type of military court reserved for enemy combatants and war criminals?"

For various reasons, these apparent proposals may indeed seem "deranged." But the episode came and went with little attention from the mainstream press. For whatever reason, the mainstream press corps seems to lack a way to react to such crazy proposals.

For starters, just a guess:

In part, this reflects the refusal by the mainstream press to consult with medical or psychological specialists about Trump's mental and /or cognitive health. 

We've discussed this abdication of duty about a million times by now. For today, we'll leave it at this:

Our high-end career journalists aren't super-sharp. Beyond that, they aren't always super-honest. 

To appearances, they simply aren't willing to enter this dangerous conceptual territory. This leaves them with no obvious way to describe or report this man's apparent or possible madness.

In recent months, elements of the mainstream and Blue American press began behaving as if Trump's behavior was a mirror image of Biden's. You see that reflected in the headline atop Applebaum's essay, in which it's said that Donald J. Trump "can't finish a sentence."

We've seen Donald J. Trump finish plenty of sentences in the past few months! To some extent, that type of description seemed to go the heart of President Biden's apparent difficulties. The apparent madness of Donald J. Trump is a phenomenon of a different kind.

Having said that, we'll add this:

 We were puzzled to see that Applebaum was puzzled by certain excerpts from Trump's convention address. In her essay, she includes two brief excerpts from that endless speech which she describes as "pure gibberish."

After presenting the excerpts and describing them as gibberish, she says that Trump's "performance seemed deranged, sinister, and frightening." For now, we'll just tell you this:

The excerpts in question may (or may not) be viewed as borderline crazy. But the excerpts don't strike us as "gibberish" at all, let alone as gibberish of the pure kind.

(The fact that a major typo appears in one excerpt doesn't help Applebaum's case.)

The excerpts in questions may (or may not) be scored as borderline crazy—but why would Applebaum, an extremely important major writer, see them as gibberish? Tomorrow, we'll return to this topic, and we'll show you the excerpts in question.

In our view, something is wrong with Donald J. Trump. Also, something is keeping our major journalists from being able to say what it is—for being able to say what it is right out loud.

 

SACRED: There's nothing wrong with being 23!

WEDNESDAY, JULY 24, 2024

There's something bad wrong with this: There's nothing wrong with being 23. Almost everyone knows that.

There is something wrong with our failing American culture. Frequently, the elements of this cosmic dysfunction are almost wholly ignored.

So it was this Monday night, when the Fox News Channel aired its latest edition of the primetime "cable news" program, Gutfeld! 

There's nothing wrong with being 23, and almost everyone knows it. There's something cosmically wrong with this garbage can program—and it's one of the two or three most watched programs in all of "cable news."

We mention age for a reason. That night, the program's bosses had assembled the usual collection of flyweights to assist the program's termagant host in butchering the evening's familiar pseudo-discussions. 

There's nothing wrong with being 23! Under the circumstances, something that's wrong may be lurking within this recent profile in the New York Post:

Meet Emily Austin, the social media star behind DAZN’s Devin Haney-Ryan Garcia promotion

For a fight between two boxing stars—Devin Haney vs. Ryan Garcia Saturday night at Barclays Center—who are so active on social media, DAZN added a social media star to help in its broadcast and promotion. 

Emily Austin, a sports and entertainment host who has recently begun dabbling in political commentary as well, was recently announced as DAZN’s social presenter throughout fight week.

She was featured on multiple DAZN social channels, interviewing a plethora of the biggest figures around the fight. 

Few in media have as large of a following as Austin, which she has now brought to one of the most anticipated fights of the year. A host of her own “Hoop Chat” podcast, a Miss Universe judge and owner of her own “People’s Beauty” skincare company, Austin has 2.1 million followers on Instagram and 512.8K followers on TikTok.

[...]

Originally focused on sports, particularly basketball and the NBA, Austin has recently delved into politics. 

She is an ardent pro-Israel activist, and has been outspoken since Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack and has even met with former hostages who were released. She’s become a regular guest on “Gutfeld!” and has plans to launch her own political show on various social media platforms. 

There's nothing wrong with being 23. At least in theory, there's nothing wrong with being "a sports and entertainment host," or with being the owner of your own skincare company.

At least in theory, and in most contexts, there's nothing wrong with any of that! At least in theory, there may be something wrong with employing the person described in that April 20 profile in the way the Fox News Channel now does.

Emily Austin, 23, isn't just "a sports and entertainment host." (For the record, she's also a model and actress, according to the leading authority on her career). 

It isn't just sports and entertainment! At age 23, Austin has also "begun dabbling in political commentary," according to the profile in the Post. 

As the profile notes, that largely refers to the fact she has become a regular guest on The Channel's Gutfeld! program, one of the most disordered programs in the history of TV news.

Austin made her latest appearance this past Monday night. Before we start to show you where that went, let's go back to the beginning.

According to that profile in the Post, Austin was recently announced as DAZN’s "social presenter," whatever that is, for an upcoming "fight between two boxing stars."

That said, does anyone know what DAZN is? As it turns out, The Shadow knows—and The Shadow tells us this:

DAZN

DAZN (pronounced "da zone") is a British over-the-top sports streaming and entertainment platform. Founded in 2007 as Perform Group via the merger of Premium TV Limited and Inform Group, it is owned by Access Industries, the investment group founded by Sir Len Blavatnik, and is headquartered in London, England...

The DAZN platform was founded in 2015 and broadcasts live and on-demand sport in over 200 countries worldwide with a strong domestic presence in Italy, Spain, Germany, Japan, France, Portugal, Belgium, Taiwan, the United States and Canada, where it has key domestic broadcast rights. It is considered to be Europe's largest digital sports broadcaster with over 75 programming rights. As of 2023, the service has 20 million paid subscribers globally.

Outside of streaming, DAZN has since expanded into in-play betting, gaming, e-commerce, merchandise and ticketing...

According to that leading authority, DAZN isn't just a "sports streaming and entertainment platform." It's an over-the-top streaming platform, whatever that may mean. 

In theory, there's nothing wrong with any of the additional material in that thumbnail profile. Indeed, betting and gaming have become increasingly large components of American sports culture.

At any rate, there we see what DAZN is. As for Austin herself, she has hired on to be a presenter—and she has recently begun to dabble in politics, for example on the Gutfeld! program.

Also this:

Thanks to the democratization of media, Austin has plans to launch her own political show on various social media platforms.  At any rate, there she was, this past Monday night, seated as part of the four-member Gutfeld! panel. 

Let it further be said that, as judged by conventional norms, the model and actress is highly telegenic. Also, as we've already mentioned, she's 23 years old.

Full disclosure! You don't have to be a telegenic young woman to serve on a Gutfeld! panel! Austin shared air this enchanted evening with Dr. Drew Pinsky, a 65-year-old (male) "American media personality" and the former host of the Loveline TV program.

Full disclosure! Pinsky's commentary this evening was almost as fatuous as that which was offered by Austin. There's nothing wrong with being 23, or even with being 65. But there's something bad wrong with the moral garbage can and the journalistic gong show The Channel cracked open this night.

With apologies, we're going to wait until tomorrow to start to show you what was said on Monday's evening's program. Spoiler alert:

The journalistic content arrived in a Volkswagen bus which was crowded with clowns. The moral content may have been worse.

As we showed you yesterday, the program opened with what has become a standard theme for the program's 59-year-old bad boy host. The program began with what has become his nightly joke about Hunter Biden trying to "date" his stepmother. 

In yesterday's report, we transcribed the content of Monday night's joke. Last night, the 59-year-old man with the mountain of rage visited the theme again, two minutes into his program. 

Citizens, there he went again! Last night, his sally was substantially edgier. Here's what the termagant said:

GUTFELD (7/23/24): Speaking of Jill, where's she been, huh? And come to think of it, where's Hunter? 

Hmmmmm.

[AUDIENCE CHUCKLES, GROANS]

I hope they're not [BLEEP]ing.

[AUDIENCE ROARS]

(Feigning incomprehension) What? I mean—

Just hoping! It's a good hope!

"Didn't see that one coming, did ya?" the humorist now wonderfully said.

Each person can assess the suitability of this latest sally by this show's irrepressible host. For the record, the fact that his verb was BLEEPed by The Channel suggests to us that this is what he actually said to his shrieking studio audience:

GUTFELD: Speaking of Jill, where's she been, huh? And come to think of it, where's Hunter? 

Hmmmmm.

[AUDIENCE CHUCKLES, GROANS]

I hope they're not f*cking.

[AUDIENCE ROARS]

(Feigning incomprehension) What?...

We'll assume that's what he actually said—in his program's second minute! But this is becoming a standard theme. It's becoming the way he now kickstarts his program on a nightly basis.

We each can assess that as we will. It seems to us that this turn in American journalistic culture is worth recording for the sake of posterity.

Last week, we recorded, for posterity, the behavior of five employees on a Fox & Friends Weekend program. This week, we think it's worth recording some of what happened on Monday evening's Gutfeld!

Each citizen can assess the suitability of that early jest. In all honesty, there can be little doubt about the subsequent journalistic content of Monday evening's program.

Full disclosure: Gutfeld! is a primetime nightly program on the nation's most watched "news channel." For purposes of corporate misdirection, it's masqueraded as a "comedy show" on that "cable news" channel. 

In reality, Gutfeld! is a propaganda program—a program whose guests will push the Fox News Channel's political scripts with stunning fidelity, but also with astonishing dumbness.

Emily Austin, age 23, has begun to dabble in politics. Dr Drew, age 65, was the longtime Loveline host.

On Monday night, they were joined by a 400-pound former professional wrestler and by a comedian who is cast as the program's more thoughtful "libertarian." All such players seem to know that they're being paid by Fox to promulgate ownership's scripts

Why was Austin on that program? Tomorrow, we'll force ourselves to start to show you some you some of the things she said. Her political dabbling was astoundingly bad on this particular evening. Pinsky's dabbling wasn't much better, and for sheer unvarnished dumbness, Gutfeld himself came close to taking the cake.

Conspiracy theories were floating about, most of them involving the imagined machinations of "Dr. President Jill." This program is a braincell-devouring moral cesspool, night after night after night. 

"Sacred Troy must die," Hector of the shining helmet once quite famously said. He delivered this prophecy to Andromache, his generous wife.

As our own sacred culture continues to die, the people who went to the finer schools agree not to notice or comment.

Has the first lady been BLEEPing her son? Over there, on the Fox News Channel, telegenic young people are dabbling in news and inquiring minds want to know.

Tomorrow: Yes, it was really this stupid

Can Candidate Harris win this election?

TUESDAY, JULY 23, 2024

Some reasons to harbor some doubts: Can Kamala Haris win this election?

She'll be running against the craziest person ever nominated for the job. But here's what the New York Times' Bret Stephens tells Gail Collins today as part of their weekly Conversation:

Can Kamala Harris Step Up? Asking for a Friend.

[...]

Gail: Kamala Harris is [Biden's] vice president who’s served him well and loyally. Not to endorse her would be a real diss. And given the fact that we’re only talking about weeks until the nomination, it’s hard to imagine a rebellion. None of those other talented, qualified Democrats are standout stars who’d be obvious alternatives.

Bret:  You may be right, but if that’s true, I think we can say hello to President Trump right now. Harris is an even weaker candidate than Biden. Not that I’ll vote for Trump, but I don’t think I can vote for her.

[...] 

I’m happy to vote for a middle-of-the-road, seasoned Democrat, even when I disagree on many issues—that’s why I voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016 and for Biden in 2020. I could gladly vote for Gretchen Whitmer, Josh Shapiro, Andy Beshear or Wes Moore, among other promising Democratic possibilities. But I won’t vote for just any Democrat at all on the theory that definitionally they’re all better than Trump. I don’t believe that. And I don’t believe that Trump means the end of democracy or civilization or life on Earth. 

Stephens has been anti-Trump, going all the way back. He says he would vote for Whitmer, Shapiro, Beshear or Moore—but he says he won't vote for Harris, and he says there are other anti-Trump voters who think the same way he does.

That doesn't mean that Harris can't win. As we've noted, she'll be running against the most disordered person who ever won a major party's nomination.

That said, the Democratic Party and the media moguls of Blue America have never quite managed to zero in on the apparent madness of this particular candidate.

The upper-class cable stars of our own Blue America have proven to be world-class experts at the ancient task of speaking to no one but themselves. In this case, that means the "dear friends" and "beloved colleagues" with whom they serve in the cable news army, their "favorite reporters and friends."

They focused on trying to LOCK HIM UP, endlessly pimping a Gotham trial which was so shaky that Governor Cuomo recently said the whole darn thing was a con. 

They spoke and thought about nothing else, month after month after month. Vast swaths of the electorate stopped listening to them a long time ago, except when clips of their more-than-occasional lunacies are played on the Fox News Channel for purposes of derision and tribal amusement. 

Meanwhile, Harris will be saddled with certain parts of the Biden legacy. We assume it's absurd to think that she was somehow "the border czar"—that she was somehow responsible for the administration's policies, such as they were, at the southern border.

That said, she was saddled with the claim, or at least with the impression, that she actually was some such potentate. For the reason why this may serve as an anvil around her neck, we recommend Kevin Drum's new post, which appears beneath this headline:

Liberal and conservative myths about illegal immigration

One of Kevin's "liberal myths" is shown below. Candidate Harris is going to have to negotiate this:

Liberal myths

Myth: "Crisis" talk is just conservative scaremongering.

Reality: Illegal immigration has skyrocketed under Joe Biden. Both Obama and Trump averaged about 35,000 migrants per month. Biden has averaged nearly 200,000 per month.

For the record, it wasn't just the much larger numbers; it was also The Silence. As those numbers grew and grew, the situation was widely discussed—except by Blue America's solipsistic media stars and of course by President Biden.

On its face, the situation seemed to be crazy—but the president maintained a silence to rival the silence of God in Bergman's Seventh Seal. That was the president's dereliction, but Candidate Harris will now be forced to explain it.

For the record, the remarkable silence of President Biden extended to other areas of concern. That included widespread concern about the cost of living, as distinct from the current rate of inflation. 

We'll assume that he may have maintained his astonishing silence because it would have been increasingly difficult for him to engage in normal presidential discourse, a problem which finally seemed to become apparent on June 27. Some such possible disability is, of course, no one's "fault."

That said—however that matter is assessed, his silence was vast and deafening. That makes it especially repulsive to read the kind of hagiography churned by Jon Meacham in today's New York Times, where he ladles such foofaw as this:

Joe Biden, My Friend and an American Hero

[...]

Mr. Biden has spent a lifetime trying to do right by the nation, and he did so in the most epic of ways when he chose to end his campaign for re-election. His decision is one of the most remarkable acts of leadership in our history, an act of self-sacrifice that places him in the company of George Washington, who also stepped away from the presidency. To put something ahead of one’s immediate desires—to give, rather than to try to take—is perhaps the most difficult thing for any human being to do. And Mr. Biden has done just that.

To be clear: Mr. Biden is my friend, and it has been a privilege to help him when I can. Not because I am a Democrat—I belong to neither party and have voted for both Democrats and Republicans—but because I believe him to be a defender of the Constitution and a public servant of honor and of grace at a time when extreme forces threaten the nation. I do not agree with everything he has done or wanted to do in terms of policy. But I know him to be a good man, a patriot and a president who has met challenges all too similar to those Abraham Lincoln faced.

Did President Biden decide to sacrifice power in the manner of President Washington? Or did he hang on in hiding for months on end, deceiving the public and maintaining a silence until hiding was no longer possible?

We don't know the answer to that—and when people start to lose their mental faculties, they may lose the ability to realize that they've lost their mental faculties. So it went, for example, with Lear.

That said, President Biden only stepped aside when it became fairly clear that he had no other option. That doesn't mean that he's a bad person—it means he's a person person.

It means he's a person person! It doesn't mean that he made some sort of astounding sacrifice, as Washington once did.

We've always liked Meacham for his good sense of humor, but he was a hagiographer for President Bush the elder, and he plays the same role for President Biden now. The silly bad judgment on display in his piece has been widespread across Blue America's journalistic elites, helping bring our flailing nation to this astonishing place.

The woods are lovely, dark and deep, but we aren't an especially brilliant species, not even Over Here in Blue America, where the children and journalists are all above average and the colleagues are all beloved. Sadly, as our leaders have formed this silly cult, they've dropped that same bomb on The Others.

Will Candidate Harris be able to win this election? She's running again the craziest candidate in American history, so at least there's that.

That said, she doesn't seem to be a giant political talent, in the manner of a Reagan, a Bill Clinton or an Obama. 

As we've noted in the past, almost no one is! We hope she finds her way through, though it sounds like Stephens may have been lost.

RAGE: Her emergence was cause for hope...

TUESDAY, JULY 23, 2024

...except on the Gutfeld! program: "I still believe in a place called Hope," Candidate Bill Clinton said.

In one sense, the candidate was referring to his small hometown in southwestern Arkansas. In a larger sense, he was sketching a stance with respect to his large, sprawling nation and with respect to its place in the world.

"I still believe in Joe Biden," Mika Brzezinski said on Morning Joe in the immediate aftermath of the June 27 debate. By that time, we ourselves no longer held such belief. 

Most specifically, we no longer believed in President Biden as a candidate for re-election. For the record, our concerns about this important political figure didn't end there.

At any rate, we no longer believed in President Biden as a candidate for re-election. We'd been actively concerned since last August. We'd been surprised when his campaign agreed to that early debate. 

On the evening of June 27, our concern almost seemed prophetic. In truth, we hadn't pictured anything as bad as the performance we all watched that night.

In our view, President Biden's better angels were back on display in his various statements of the past several days. It was good to see them back.

Yesterday afternoon, President Biden was emotionally generous and full of hope when he spoke with Candidate Harris by telephone, in a public conversation everyone could hear. As for Candidate Harris herself, her emergence as her party's presumptive nominee has given us cause for hope.

In the course of the next few days, we expect to discuss what we see as the possible strengths and weaknesses of that new candidacy. That said, while we felt a resurgence of hope, elsewhere we saw the vulgar, coarse and stupid by-products of the ancient emotion called rage.

Most specifically, we're talking about what we saw last night, in the 10 o'clock hour, when we watched the latest edition of the Fox News Channel's Gutfeld! program.

Briefly, let's be clear! To our eye and ear, the rage to which we refer belonged to the program's host alone. We'd classify his four guests in a somewhat different manner.

At least two famous phrases come to mind when we think about the performances of last evening's guests. Rather than traffic in such unpleasant terms, we'll merely post the roster of the people the Fox News Channel assembled last night, allegedly for the purpose of discussing the nation's news.

Our capsule bios of these unmistakable flyweights are largely drawn from the leading authority on their lives and their careers:

Cast of Gutfeld! TV show: July 22, 2024

Emily Austin: 23-year-old model and actress. A judge at Miss Universe 2022. "Now working with DAZN on their boxing coverage."

Tyrus: American cable news personality, actor, and former professional wrestler. Now performs as a comedian.

Kat Timpf: Performs as a comedian. Is cast and performs as the Gutfeld! program's somewhat more thoughtful "libertarian."

Dr. Drew Pinsky: Formerly, co-host of the MTV program Loveline. "Between February and March 2020, Pinsky made a series of statements concerning the COVID-19 outbreak where he downplayed the seriousness of the pandemic, stating that it was not as bad as the flu, and suggested that it was a 'press-induced panic.' "

The Fox News Channel assembled that group to discuss, or to pretend to discuss, the presidential campaign. Last night, this produced an imitation of discourse which veered between alarmingly ugly and just plain deeply stupid. 

We wouldn't say that those participants displayed the emotion known as rage in the various things they said. We would describe the program's host as being saddled with that emotion.

Greg Gutfeld, the program's host, is a 59-year-old man who performs as a comedian. In our view, he gives voice to many perfectly valid complaints about the conduct of the Biden administration, and about the values and the behaviors of the liberal / progressive world.

(On balance, you may not agree with his complaints, but we'd frequently score them as valid. Embarrassingly, some of his specific complains are just plain factually accurate.)

Many of the host's complaints strike us as uncomfortably valid. That said, his reasonable complaints are routinely swamped by his ugly, unrelenting state of rage.

In the course of the next few days, we'll plan to show you some of the things which were said last night. We'll likely start with the rage-filled host—with the jokes with which he started his show, such tasteful jokes as these:

GUTFELD (7/22/24): The only question that remains now for the Biden family is this:

Does Joe's dementia mean that Hunter can ask Jill out?

[AUDIENCE GROANS]

It's always there.

And finally, it's been pointed out that Biden dropped out on National Ice Cream Day. 

Even more ironic, it is also National Crap Your Pants Day.

[LAUGHTER] 

All right! Let's do a monologue!

With that, at 10:03 p.m., the opening jokes reached a merciful end. From there, the termagant proceeded to stage a series of pseudo-discussions with his flyweight guests.

The Fox News Channel opens this can at 10 p.m. every night. The host of the program gives voice to his rage, but also to his apparent old-school misogyny. 

In turn, his guests produce the stupidest pseudo-discussions available on the planet. As this intellectual and moral garbage is broadcast to millions of people, the timorous players in Blue America politely avert their gaze.

Last night's pseudo-discussions were about as stupid as alleged public discourse gets. The guests floated many suggestions. You might call them "conspiracy theories."

You might refer to their insinuations as "conspiracy theories!" Conspiracy theories about the recent assassination attempt. Conspiracy theories about what must have led to President Biden's decision to withdraw from the race.

Conspiracy theories about the machinations which must be occurring within the Biden/Harris camp. Conspiracy theories about Hillary Clinton, who may become Candidate Harris' running-mate!

You can't get dumber than these people are. Presumably, no one is dumber than Austin was last night, but Pinsky came amazingly close.

The guests are "useful," if you know what we mean—but they're also "enablers." Behind them lies the corporate entity which uses such flyweights as tools.

Wrestlers and models and Gutfeld oh my! Meanwhile, in Blue America, the finer people at our finest news orgs agree to avert their gaze.

The Iliad helps us see where human rage can lead. We may post the relevant prose again in the course of the next few days.

Candidate Harris has given us hope. Then too, we have the rage of the Gutfeld! program, and of various other players—and we have the endless silence from Blue America's brightest and finest and best.

Commenter makes sagacious remark!

MONDAY, JULY 22, 2024

TV giant doesn't: A commenter to Kevin Drum's most recent post makes a sagacious remark. Just for the record, Drum's headline says this:

Kamala Harris will poll as well as Biden by next week

For ourselves, we hope she'll be polling better than President Biden by next week and will continue upward from there. Given Trump's "unelectable" status, we can't say that such things are impossible.

That said, back to the sagacious remark:

The sagacious observation in question comes in the midst of a longer discussion. For current purposes, the larger context doesn't matter. The highlighted observation does:

COMMENTER (7/22/24): And we suffer their argument precisely because Democrats failed to make the case that Trump has long been lacking in cognitive capability, is a ranting, raving, usually incoherent person demonstrating his lunacy during all hours, but keeping amazingly ludicrous tweets going through the night into early-morning hours. He could not have managed the presidential duties these past four years.

It's true! Democrats have failed to make that case about the apparent cognitive state of former president Trump. So have Blue America's thought leaders, including those we see every day on Blue America's cable news channel.

Kids say the darnedest things, Art Linkletter famously said. For years, former president Trump has said—and has frequently seemed to believe—the stone-cold craziest things. He has said, and has possibly seemed to believe, such crazy things down through the years.

That was especially true in the aftermath of the November 2020 election, when he surrounded himself with the craziest people found on the planet, with many associates—including many former associates who had turned against him—insisting that, at best they could tell, he actually believed his various ludicrous claims.

Why have a variety of entities—upper-end mainstream press corps included—"failed to [examine the possibility] that Trump has long been lacking in cognitive capability?" 

You're asking an excellent question! To some extent, the answer may involve this:

Blue America has reveled in the decision to brand Trump a LIAR. When the upper-end press corps walked away from its previous (well-founded) restrictions of the use of such terms, they were praised for the courage of their (ill-advised) decision.

Here was one (and only one) of the problems with that decision:

If Trump is just telling a bunch of LIES, there's nothing wrong with his cognition. By definition, a LIAR knows what he's doing when he tells a LIE. 

He's saying something he knows is untrue in the belief that he can fool the people he's targeting. There's nothing wrong with a liar's cognition. There's something bad wrong with his ethics.

For many liberals, it has felt amazingly good to refer to Donald Trump's LIES. In our view, the decision to start trafficking in such claims was a very poor decision on the part of the upper-end press.

There are several reasons for that judgment, but the commenter's sagacious observation starts to hit upon one. Once you've decided to show your courage by branding crazy statements as LIES, you've much wiped away the possibility that the author of the crazy statements has gone crazy nuts in the head.

In our view, Trump's cognition has always been in question. Long ago, journalists should have interviewed (carefully selected) medical specialists with regard to the crazy claims Trump and his nuttier colleagues have persistently made.

In our view, also this:

Just from a political standpoint, it's much more effective to say that someone is making "absurd misstatements" that it is to say that he's LYING. That's especially true when the people making the accusation are quite routinely making inaccurate statements themselves.

Is something wrong with Donald J. Trump's cognition? If we remember correctly, some of the medical specialists in Dr. Bandy X. Lee's best-selling book questioned Trump's cognitive status as well as his apparent psychiatric disorders. 

That said, sad! Our journalists have insisted, to this very day, that subjects like these cannot be discussed. They decided to brandish their L-bombs instead.

In our view, that decision was unwise on the journalistic merits. Also, we'd say that it has been unhelpful on a political basis.

The commenter made a sagacious remark. Yesterday, in the New York Times, Aaron Sorkin didn't.

We'd say his suggestion was silly and sad. So was the fact that the New York Times decided to publish the column he offered. More, perhaps, on the morrow.

US, CLAUDIUS: We're pulling for Candidate Harris now!

MONDAY, JULY 22, 2024

How to pronounce her first name: As of Saturday morning, two famous fictional persons headlined the White House campaign.

The Democrats were going to nominate Lear. The Republicans had already nominated Agamemnon, lord of men.

In the Iliad, Agamemnon is the warrior / commander who stands anointed by God. He holds the royal scepter which tracks back directly to Zeus. 

Despite his endless emotional meltdowns and his propensity to explosions of rage, this establishes him as "lord of men" among the poem's Achaeans.

Starting in Book 1 in this poem of war, his explosive rage and his emotional breakdowns drive large parts of the action. Highly capable seasoned lieutenants—especially Nestor, the seasoned charioteer—keep intervening to rescue him from his madness, his lack of stability.

As of last Thursday night, the GOP had nominated Agamemnon, and he had accepted their nomination. It was widely believed, within that party, that he was under the special protection of God—even of "our lord and savior Jesus Christ," or so five friends had scored the matter on the Fox News Channel.

As of last Thursday night, the GOP had officially chosen Agamemnon. As of Saturday morning, we Democrats still seemed to be saddled with our own King Lear.

At age 81 (and with 82 fast approaching), it had become fairly clear that his faculties were now diminished. Also, it seemed fairly clear that a fairly substantial attempt had been made to keep this news from the public. 

This apparent effort started coming undone with his disastrous performance at the June 27 debate. But as with the fictional king who once raged across the moors, it seemed that our candidate might not be able to recognize the basic facts concerning his personal and political situations.

Yesterday afternoon, President Biden withdrew from the race. At this site, this leaves us praying that Kamala Harris will build a winning campaign.

Tens of millions of our fellow citizens disagree with our assessment concerning this year's election.  Needless to say, they have every right to their views. They remain our neighbors and friends.

That said, we ourselves are hoping that Candidate Harris will prevail. Surely, though, there is one point on which we can all agree:

Can we all agree on one point? Can we agree that the time has come when we comically hapless human beings should learn how to pronounce this candidate's first name?

Kamala Haris has been vice president of the United States for almost four years now. In 2109, she wrote a book in which, among other things, she explained how to pronounce her name.

The book was called The Truths We Hold: An American Journey. As you can see in the publisher's excerpt, one of those truths was this:

An Excerpt from The Truths We Hold by Kamala Harris

[...] 

This book is not meant to be a policy platform, much less a fifty-point plan. Instead, it is a collection of ideas and viewpoints and stories, from my life and from the lives of the many people I’ve met along the way.

Just two more things to mention before we get started:

First, my name is pronounced “comma-la,” like the punctuation mark. It means “lotus flower,” which is a symbol of significance in Indian culture. A lotus grows underwater, its flower rising above the surface while its roots are planted firmly in the river bottom.

And second, I want you to know how personal this is for me. This is the story of my family. It is the story of my childhood. It is the story of the life I have built since then. You’ll meet my family and my friends, my colleagues and my team. I hope you will cherish them as I do and, through my telling, see that nothing I have ever accomplished could have been done on my own.

Perhaps a tiny bit whimsically, Harris started by telling us the people how to pronounce her first name. Given the blinding stupidity of our discourse, this basic lesson remains largely unlearned today, even at the highest levels.

How stupid is our American discourse? How childish are many of the major players within our American discourse?

Concerning the childishness and the stupidity, please consider this:

As of the summer of 2020, Senator Harris had been chosen as the Democratic Party's nominee for vice president. At that point, it occurred to some observers that we the people should possibly learn how to pronounce her first name.

To her credit, Kate Sullivan gave it a try. In August 2020, she published a column for CNN's web site which appeared beneath this headline:

It’s ‘comma-la’: How to pronounce Kamala Harris’ name

Sullivan tried to let everyone know how to pronounce that name. Given the childishness of some of our nation's "thought leaders," she might as well have tried to catch the wind. 

Knowing how to pronounce that name was hard! It's also p[osisble that some major players didn't much want to be bothered.

One week later, Steven Petrow wrote a column on the same subject for USA Today. Petrow pushed a bit harder than Sullivan had. For our money, he may have gotten a tiny bit huffy.

Still, he too laid out the basic facts. Headline included, his column started like this:

Kamala Harris' name isn't difficult to pronounce. There's no excuse for getting it wrong.

I’m a pretty chill guy and I know my last name isn’t the easiest to pronounce, like many immigrant names. I appreciate it when people ask me how to say it and I’ll tell them, it’s “PEH-trow” not “PEE-trow.” Often I’ll correct someone who mispronounces it—once or twice, maybe a third—always with a smile. But if they continue to call me “PEE-trow,” it’s pretty obvious that that they’re either not listening or just don’t care. Either way, it’s a sign of disrespect.

Speaking of disrespect, the Fox News anchor Tucker Carlson got hot under the collar last week when Richard Goodstein, a Democratic strategist, corrected his mispronunciation of Sen. Kamala Harris, the presumptive Democratic vice presidential nominee. Goodstein explained to Carlson that Harris’ name “is pronounced ‘comma'—like the punctuation mark—'la.' Comma-la.” He added, “Out of respect, for somebody who’s going to be on the national ticket, pronouncing her name right is actually kind of a bare minimum.”

Carlson, whose name is easy to pronounce because it’s both familiar and Anglo-Saxon, didn’t take it in stride and respond with, “Thanks for letting me know that.” Instead, he volleyed back, “So what?” and then lashed out saying, “So I’m disrespecting her by mispronouncing her name unintentionally?”

"So what?" Tucker replied. Last week, there he was, in Milwaukee, hobnobbing with Agamemnon in the person of Donald J. Trump.

For our money, Petrow was perhaps a bit huffy all through the course of his column. He adopted a bit of the scolding tone which has become a distinguishing characteristic of Blue America's tribal culture—a cultural characteristic which has almost surely caused substantial political harm.

That said, Petrow captured the petulant, childish reaction of one of our nation's major thought leaders at that point in time. There was Carlson, in effect defending his right to mispronounce Harris' name! 

As of last Saturday morning, there were two unelectable candidates in the race—their Agamemnon, our Lear. One of the two has now left the race—but can Candidate Harris prevail?

Also this! Given the sheer stupidity of our culture, will multimillionaire TV stars ever be willing and able to correctly pronounce her first name? 

We start today with that utterly silly point. As the week proceeds, we'll move on to matters which are a bit more substantial.

As we do, we'll be thinking of two other fictionalized historical figures. We'll be thinking of the Roman emperor Claudius—and we'll be thinking of Livia, murderous grandmother to this Roman god.

Robert Graves explored these historical figures in two acclaimed novels of the 1930s—I, Claudius (1934), followed by Claudius the God (1935). 

In 1976, the BBC adapted the novels in a major, 13-episode TV series. In this country, the series became a very big deal when PBS aired it as part of its Masterpiece Theater franchise.

The series portrayed a thoroughly novelized public discourse—a discourse in which the people of imperial Rome were fed a never-ending series of novelized accounts of the actual power plays controlling access to the imperial throne.

In real life, Claudius, who spoke with a persistent stammer, "was the fourth Emperor of the Roman Empire, from AD 41 to 54." What was his grandmother like in real life?

We can't necessarily tell you that! But in the fictionalized narratives penned by Graves, Livia liked to poison her rivals. Perhaps more strikingly, she was skilled at misleading the public about the power plays which determined control of the throne. 

Fictitious stories drive much of our discourse today. In that sense, we're all Claudius now!

Our candidate's challenging name to the side, these fictitions come from all major sides. Even as we seek the best ways to root for our new candidate, we'll examine some of these fictitions this week.

Tomorrow: Sandra Smith and her own lying' eyes

SUNDAY: President Johnson withdrew from the race!

SUNDAY, JULY 21, 2024

As has President Biden: We had come to think more poorly of President Biden over the course of the past year.

The reasons can be listed at some later date. For today, his announcement that he will be stepping aside took us all the way back to our junior year in college.

On the evening of March 31, 1968, we sat in the Dunster House TV room, watching President Johnson's scheduled speech about Vietnam. As recalled in an NPR report (from 2018), here's what happened that night:

Remembering 1968: LBJ Surprises Nation With Announcement He Won't Seek Re-Election

[...]

He spoke of a pause in the massive bombing campaign that was devastating much of communist North Vietnam and portions of embattled South Vietnam, where the U.S. was defending an anti-communist regime.

Johnson's speech was his most earnest plea yet to be taken seriously as a peacemaker. He meant that plea to be validated by the closing statement he had chosen to include that night. Instead, that statement caught the nation by surprise, shattered the political landscape and utterly overshadowed the rest of the speech.

"With America's sons in the fields far away, with America's future under challenge right here at home, with our hopes and the world's hopes for peace in the balance every day, I do not believe that I should devote an hour or a day of my time to any personal partisan causes or to any duties other than the awesome duties of this office—the presidency of this country," Johnson intoned, looking earnestly into the camera lens.

Tens of millions of viewers suddenly came to full attention. What did he just say? What could that mean?

We recall coming to full attention. Here's what President Johnson said next:

"Accordingly, I shall not seek, and I will not accept, the nomination of my party for another term as your president."

The announcement was a total surprise.  We believe a few cheers went up in the TV room. 

Four days later, Dr. King was shot and killed. Senator Kennedy was shot and killed two months and two days after that.

President Johnson's announcement that night was a complete surprise. Almost surely, cheers went up in the TV room. At that time, cheers would go up during the evening news any time Walter Cronkite announced that the Dow Jones average had gone down.

For ourselves, we recall feeling sorry for President Johnson that night. Despite the shrinking regard we'd come to have for President Biden and his family and his team, we also feel sorry for President Biden today. 

While we're at it, also this:

We recommend feeling sorry for the child who suffered the "childhood traumas" referred to by Usha Vance during Wednesday night's convention speech. 

Earlier today, we watched an hour-long, C-Span interview from September 2017. On that C-Span videotape, David Rubinstein interviews the author of Hillbilly Elegy about the contents of his widely acclaimed book, including the circumstances in which he grew up.

The author who spoke with Rubinstein that day was good-humored, smart and personable. As we watched that tape today, we wondered how the child who suffered those childhood traumas had become that apparently calm and balanced man. 

We also wondered how that apparently calm and balanced man had become the J. D. Vance of today. We aren't going to vote for Vance, but we do know how to feel sorry for the classic "motherless child."

In the past, we've even recommended pity for Donald J. Trump, who was born to a father who has been described, by one of his grandchildren, as a sociopath. 

We recommend pity for any child born to such a person. In the current circumstance, we also recommend political defeat for the disordered adult that unfortunate child became.

As of this morning, it seemed that our own Blue America hadn't found the way to defeat Candidate Trump. Tens of millions of our fellow citizens disagree with our assessment of that "disordered" man, as is their perfect right.

It also seemed that we Blues are incapable of imagining that some of the fault in our stunningly bad political performance could possibly lie with us.

The search for Candidate Biden's replacement starts right now. Needless to say, Candidate Trump may get him locked up.

Trying to get the guy locked up, while ignoring almost everything else!

We recommend C-Span's Hillbilly Elegy tape! We wouldn't vote for the current version of Vance, but we recommend pity for the traumatized child who arrived here before the grown man.

SATURDAY: AOC has been flashing white power signs...

SATURDAY, JULY 20, 2024

...and climate change is a hoax: This past Tuesday, USA Today filed a report about a relatively minor apparent effect of ongoing climate change.

For the record, the report assumes the truth of a fairly obvious fact. It assumes the fact that climate change is actually occurring. 

As recent events may seem to suggest, climate change is actually happening! (Unless you're paid by Fox.) At any rate, here's what USA Today's news report said, headline included:

Climate change is making days (a little) longer, study says

Two new scientific studies suggest that global warming is changing the rotation of the Earth and is also increasing the length of day "at an unprecedented rate."

Here's what's happening: As the planet heats up, ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica are melting, and this water from the polar regions is flowing into the world’s oceans–and especially into the equatorial region. This is changing the Earth's shape and thus slowing its speed of rotation.

“This means that a shift in mass is taking place, and this is affecting the Earth’s rotation,” explained co-author Benedikt Soja of the Swiss University ETH Zurich, in a statement.

Thus, as the Earth is turning more slowly, the days are getting longer, albeit only minimally, on the order of a few milliseconds a day. But it's potentially enough to affect GPS, communications and even space travel.

And so on from there. For the transcript of an NPR discussion of this same topic, you can just click here.

So it went as major news orgs reported these new studies. Below, we're going to show you the way the circus clowns on the Gutfeld! program reacted to USA Today's report.

Welcome to the American Babel! More specifically, welcome to the American Babel in our failing nation's destructive era of journalistic "segregation by viewpoint." 

For the reactions from the Gutfeld! program's boatload of fools, we invite you to keep reading. First, though, we want to report what AOC has "shockingly" done.

"Shockingly," AOC has been caught flashing a white power sign! For that, we'll visit the gang on Fox & Friends Weekend, this very morning:

Fox & Friends Weekend, this morning:

This very morning—credit where due!—Will Cain came fighting back.

Within the past week, it had been said that Cain is the mildest of the three friends who co-host Fox & Friends Weekend. 

As perhaps with Steve Doocy something like a month ago, so too possibly here! When Fox News employees get tagged as soft, they have to come fighting back.

So it may have happened today, early in the 7 o'clock hour:

The friends were discussing a recent TikTok video posted by AOC. In the video, AOC criticizes fellow Democrats for failing to go on the record when they say that President Biden should abandon his White House campaign. 

(For ourselves, we'd criticize AOC for doing what so many do. We'd criticize her for acting like there's only one way—hers!—to assess this complex situation.)

Back to this morning's show! After Rachel and Pete had spent kicked AOC around a bit, Will jumped into the fray with this peculiar statement:

CAIN (7/20/24): She shockingly flashed a white power symbol throughout that video. I don't know what she was trying to get—we had a national reckoning about that years ago. Many people were fired. Many people were kicked out of Wrigley Field.

Say what? Rep. Ocasio-Cortez had been flashing a white power sign?

To us, that sounded unlikely. But "knowing how way leads on to way," we assumed we'd find the source of Cain's claim in a quick search online. 

Sure enough! There it was, the latest dispatch from Our Modern American Babel. Some nutcases at some of the nuttier outposts have been pimping this claim online. 

This morning, Cain took the claim and he ran. He was now the nuttiest friend—the one who was driving the clowncar!

Was AOC flashing white power signs in her TikTok post? Cain didn't attempt to explain what he meant. He made no attempt to offer evidence in support of his puzzling claim. 

He simply floated the puzzling claim—took the bullroar and ran. Inevitably, the other two stooges were eager to help. Rachel Campos-Duffy, who's enormously genial but truly believes, quickly jumped in with this:

CAIN: She shockingly flashed a white power symbol throughout that video. I don't know what she was trying to get—we had a national reckoning about that years ago. Many people were fired. Many people were kicked out of Wrigley Field.

CAMPOS-DUFFY: You can be sure she won't be.

AOC won't be kicked out of Wrigley Field! With that standard bow to tribal resentment, the trio of friends moved on. 

Welcome to the American Babel, where every claim of this type is true, and no inanity gets left behind

The Gutfeld! program, last night:

With that, we return to last night's Gutfeld! program. 

As usual, The Savage Chimp opened with his standard array of ugly jokes about those with whom he disagrees. Nancy Pelosi doesn't look right in a bikini these days, this sick little nutcase instantly said. 

Eventually, he started pretending to conduct discussions of actual issues. Midway through the program, he introduced that article from USA Today as the starting point for a segment.

You may recall what the headline said. The headline in question said this:

Climate change is making days (a little) longer, study says

That news report was the basis for the pseudo-discussion which ensued. After describing the finding of the study, he threw to Charly Arnholt to start the pseudo-discussion.

Arnholt is conventionally attractive, and she's still young enough. Like other guests on this prime time "news program," she's also a genuine flyweight.

Beyond that, she's paid to behave in the ways she behaves. With USA Today's headline shown on the screen, here's how the "discussion" started:

GUTFELD (7/19/24): Charly, new research indicates the earth's rotation is slowing down because melting polar ice is shifting the earth's mass around the equator. Days are now a few milliseconds longer. 

Can you explain the science to me?

ARNHOLT: I don't know who's mad about this! I'm happy about this, if this is true. I love climate change if this is true, because I'm always complaining about how the days are too short. 

I wish I had more time. I mean, I'll be honest, it's only by a few milliseconds per day—

GUTFELD: But it adds up!

ARNHOLT: OK, but I would like to take this time to say thank you to the made-up hoax called climate change if this is in fact true. And to discuss it further, I'd like to offer myself for a trip to the Mediterranean on Mark Zuckerberg's new mega-yacht—$300 million, 278 feet. I feel like that's the perfect place, perfect locale, to have a discussion about climate change.

[APPLAUSE] 

For the record, the audiences for this show aren't super-impressive either.

As noted, Arnholt is a genuine flyweight, like almost all Gutfeld! guests. That said, she understands her casting within the journalistic hoax known as the Fox News Channel.

As we've noted, Gutfeld himself routinely describes climate change as a hoax. A few weeks ago, he listed it among what he called "the major hoaxes."

Arnholt had nothing to say about the topic at hand, but she knew she could float that vibe. And so, just like that, she did.

As the pseudo-discussion proceeded, Gutfeld worked in one of his nightly jokes about Joy Behar being too fat. (The younger Arnholt isn't.) Soon, though, he shared his own scientific greatness concerning the "idiotic" claims of the world's major climate scientists.

He spoke to the flyweight Rob Long:

GUTFELD: You know, Rob, this is just another hoax that's going to implode...We already know that the climate models are completely idiotic—

LONG: Right.

GUTFELD: —and the idea that you can measure the temperature of the earth? No one's ever questioned that, but you can't do it. So all of this is bull[BLEEP]. We're just getting around to finding that out.

LONG: They're running out of things to declare the emergency. Well obviously, the oceans are all going to rise. We'll all be living underwater. We'll have to grow gills.

Long is an undisguised flyweight, but he knows what he's paid to say. Meanwhile, just to be clear:

When Gutfeld said the whole thing is "bullshit," the suits at Fox bleeped the second part of that very bad word. The bosses at Fox are very careful about what they allow on the air!

This sort of thing goes on, night after night, as the clowncar brings these tools to the set of this propaganda program. Also this:

As this clown show helps produce our present-day American Babel, major news orgs in Blue America know to avert their eyes. This garbage transpires night after night. The Times agrees not to notice.

For the record, the host of this pathetic show is sometimes right on the merits concerning the topics he mentions. Given the way our own Blue America has functioned in recent years, it's very hard to be totally wrong if you're working for Fox.

It's hard to be totally wrong on Fox! We expect to explore that embarrassing but highly salient fact at the start of the coming week.

Concerning those childhood traumas, part 2!

FRIDAY, JULY 19, 2024

The New York Times reports: Yesterday afternoon, we wrote about the part of Usha Vance's convention speech in which she referred to her husband's "childhood traumas."

For us, the unusual reference triggered recollections of her husband's best-selling book, Hillbilly Elegy, which we speed-read in a bookstore when it first came out.

Based on the mistreatment and neglect which lay behind those childhood traumas, we recommended pity for the child. But we also suggested possible concern about the effect those traumas might have on the grown man, later in life. 

In this morning's New York Times, Sharon LaFraniere offers a report which covers much of this same ground. Her report appeared online two days ago. We hadn't seen it until it appeared in today's print editions.

What kinds of mistreatment and neglect were we vaguely referencing? At the start of her report, LaFraniere offers examples:

J.D. Vance Has Written of His Struggles to Control His Anger

Senator J.D. Vance’s rapid political evolution from a moderate Republican to a leader of former President Donald J. Trump’s movement is one of the best-known aspects of his life.

Less so is his personal struggle to gain control of his anger, a battle that he documented in his memoir “Hillbilly Elegy,” published in 2016. “Even at my best, I’m a delayed explosion,” he wrote.

There is not much question why. Violence and conflict were part of his upbringing.

Mr. Vance’s grandmother, infuriated by her husband’s alcoholism, poured gasoline on him after he fell asleep on the couch in a drunken stupor, then dropped a flaming match on his chest. He survived.

Mr. Vance’s mother, who battled drug addiction, was so enraged at J.D. once that she threatened to crash their car and kill them both. He fled the car in terror and then watched her being driven off in the back of a police car.

When he was very young, Mr. Vance wrote, he tried to hide from the fights between his mother and whomever was her current partner. Later, he would run downstairs or listen through the wall, heart racing, simultaneously drawn to and repelled by the conflict. “When she lay sobbing in bed after another failed relationship, I felt a rage that could have driven me to kill,” he wrote. 

Experiences of the kind described may well produce "childhood traumas." For the record, the woman who poured gasoline on her husband, then set him on fire, was being praised for her moral greatness at the convention this past Wednesday night.

The highlight of Vance's convention speech was his rumination about his desire to return to the nation's tenth poorest county when it comes time for him to be buried. 

He hopes his children will also be buried in that tenth poorest county, alongside their troubled ancestors. Especially from a candidate who is supposed to represent youth, this may have been the strangest ambitions ever described at a national party convention.

For obvious reasons, we recommend pity for any child who grew up amid such abuse and neglect. In her report, LaFraniere describes the way Vance eventually tried to deal with the aftermath of those traumas:

Once he eventually realized he had to confront his inner demons, he tried counseling, he wrote, but “talking to some stranger about my feelings made me want to vomit.”

Instead, he hit the library. He read about how the consequences of childhood trauma last far into adulthood. He talked to his sister and his aunt, trying to understand his past.

But the real antidote, he wrote, proved to be Usha, whom he married in 2014. Close friends of the couple describe her as a steadying force.

“I continue to struggle with conflict, to fight the statistical odds that sometimes seem to bear down on me,” Mr. Vance wrote. “The sad fact is that I couldn’t do it without Usha.”

“I can be defused, but only with skill and precision. It’s not just that I’ve learned to control myself,” he wrote, “but that Usha has learned how to manage me.”

To be clear, that's what Vance wrote roughly a decade ago, before he published his best-selling book. Also, all praise and great thanks to Usha Vance, assuming the book's account is accurate.

That said:

Vance has had an erratic political career. All in all, after graduating from Yale Law School, he has led a somewhat erratic public life. Now that's he's a Trumper, his career has been marked by a fair amount of unnecessary, inappropriate hostility directed at various political targets.

For obvious reasons, we pity the child who's been raised in the way Vance's book describes. Tragically, the price that may get paid for such abuse and neglect may show up later in life. 

FRIENDS: The Times reports on some heavy mascara!

FRIDAY, JULY 19, 2024

The Fox friends get passed over: Last night, Donald J. Trump finally confirmed the widespread report:

"I had God on my side," he confessed in the early moments of his convention speech.

By the norms of American political speech, that revelation can almost be regarded as secular. Not so with the gaggle who gathered on Fox & Friends Weekend this past Sunday morning.

We refer to the group of pseudo-journalistic friends who made such assertions as these:

6 o'clock hour:

JONES: There is no Donald Trump today without Jesus Christ this morning. I mean, we could be having a very different conversation this morning—

CAMPOS-DUFFY: That's right.

JONES: —going over the obituary of the 45th president this morning. And if it wasn't for the grace of God, things could have been different. So I give honor and glory to our lord and savior, Jesus Christ, for protecting the former president. 

6 o'clock hour:

CAMPOS-DUFFY: Yeah, it's a miracle!

HEGSETH: Providential.

CAMPOS-DUFFY: It's a miracle. And I told you guys earlier, I'm thinking more people pray over him, literally put their hands over him—there are many pictures of him in the Oval Office, and at many events, where, before then, people will pray over him. 

There is a protective shield over him. There's no question in my mind.

8 o'clock hour:

HEGSETH: We're right, first and foremost, to thank Jesus Christ, the lord almighty, that Donald Trump is safe—

CAMPOS-DUFFY: Yeah.

HEGSETH: —and those prayers went out, and to reflect on the historic nature of this.

9 o'clock hour:

CAMPOS-DUFFY: [It's] a sign of what so many believe is true about Donald Trump, that he is under a special protection because of the millions of people who have been praying for him and praying to Jesus, praying to angels, praying to the Holy Spirit to put a shield around him. 

We had Dr. Siegel on earlier, and he said this is just almost a 99% impossibility that that bullet did not enter into his head. But for a millimeter of him turning his head, right now we would be sitting on the couch talking about an assassinated former president. It's really miraculous.

9 o'clock hour:

JONES: As I said earlier in the program at the 6 a.m. hour, if it wasn't for the lord Jesus Christ, our lord and savior, we would probably be talking about obituary for the former president of the United States.

Guys, I send it back to you in New York City.

CAMPOS-DUFFY: Thank you, Lawrence.

When Donald J. Trump confirmed the report, he at least kept it semi-secular. Not so for the Fox & Friends hosts, who specifically said, through the course of four hours, that the former president had been saved by a miraculous protective shield.

According to the Fox News friends, this miraculous shield had been administered by "our lord and savior Jesus Christ"—by "Jesus Christ, the lord almighty."

The various friends said a great deal more during the course of the program. In yesterday morning's report, we transcribed more of their statements about the ways God has intervened in our politics and journalism of late.

That said, Campos-Duffy, Hegseth and Jones went where the rubber meets the road. In our view, their commentary was baldly sectarian—sectarian all the way down.

For the sake of the record, let it be said—there is no law against establishing a religious cable network. Also, there is no law against establishing a sectarian religious network.

Such cable networks already exist. There is no law against such networks, nor is there any obvious reason to think there should be.

That said, the Fox News Channel continues to pose as a standard "news channel." It seemed to us that the conduct these friends displayed constituted such a break from conventional journalistic practice that their conduct needed to be recorded for the sake of posterity.

Elsewhere, the disagreement with our assessment is general. Here's what we mean by that:

This morning, the New York Times commits an insult to human intelligence by featuring a front-page report in its print editions about Usha Vance's wardrobe, but also about the heavy mascara favored by Donald Trump's women. 

The report was prepared by Vanessa Friedman, the Times' "fashion director and chief fashion critic." Front-page headline included, Friedman's report starts like this:

CRITIC’S NOTEBOOK
Usha Vance and the Iconography of the Trump Women

J.D. Vance, the newly nominated vice-presidential candidate, may represent the new generation of the MAGA movement. But, as became clear Wednesday night when Usha Vance stepped gingerly into the spotlight to introduce her husband at the Republican convention, his wife represents change of a different kind.

That is not because she is a Yale-educated lawyer with three children, or the daughter of two Indian immigrants. It’s because she does not hew to the very specific mold of femininity that has become the norm in the world of Trump.

After all, there is a certain kind of look that the women in Mr. Trump’s closest orbit—his wife, daughters and daughters-in-law—all share, and that has become a defining gender trope in his own political reality show.

It involves a lot of hair, often left to cascade in glossy, carefully controlled Breck girl waves. It involves heavy mascara (or false eyelashes), lip gloss and vertiginous heels. It often involves a brightly colored sheath dress. It calls to mind a cross between a Miss America—or Miss Universe—pageant contestant and a Fox newscaster. It is the equivalent of the Palm Beach billionaire take on the trad wife (even if these wives also have work). It looks as if it requires a lot of effort to maintain.

On and on this analysis went, in pursuit of that "defining gender trope." For better or worse, Friedman moved next to the question of the "heavily made-up face" of Donald Trump's Jr.'s fiancée.

The report appears on the front page of today's print editions. This helps explain why millions of voters in Red America are extremely eager to get to the polls to vote against the candidates from our own Blue America nation.

That said, please consider:

On the one hand, the heavy mascara of Trump's wife and daughter and daughters in law merits a front-page report, accompanied by a photograph, in today's New York Times. By way of contrast, not a word has been written—presumably, not a word will ever be written—about what happened on the Fox News Channel this past Sunday morning.

Also, not a word is being written about the other gong-show behaviors which are so prevalent on that heavily watched and very important "cable news" channel. Within the world of Blue America's upper-class news orgs, such things simply aren't done.

Our guess would be this:

All in all, the New York Times doesn't want to tangle with Fox. Whatever the merit of that speculation may be, very few people in Blue America are aware of the ways their knowledge of the world is being restricted by the profit-oriented players who run the New York Times.

Also, by the profit-oriented players who run MSNBC! But let's postpone talk of that hapless entity. Let's wait for some other day.

In the next few says, we'll have more to offer about the performance of the Fox News Channel this week. For now, let's return to Fox & Friends Weekend—to the players who turned it into a sectarian religious channel during Sunday's prayer service.

Yesterday, we listed the names of the four (or five) players who took part in Sunday's revival meeting. That said, who's the person who kick-started this service?

We think he should try to do better. The leading authority on his life and times thumbnails him as shown:

Lawrence B. Jones

Lawrence Billy Jones III (born December 10, 1992) is an American libertarian political commentator, author and a current co-host of the weekday edition of Fox & Friends on the Fox News Channel....Jones, 31, is the youngest African American to co-host on a cable news network.

Jones was raised by his mother, Tameria and father, Lawrence Jones II. Jones has stated that he served as "youth mayor" of Garland, Texas, in 2009. He graduated from Garland High School in 2011 and studied political science and criminal justice at the University of North Texas.

Jones was hired as student advocate in the Garland Independent School District, becoming their youngest employee. When he was 19, he ran for a seat on the school board for this district, but lost the election. He served two years as a board member for Dallas County Child Welfare. In 2012, Jones was on the Garland Parks and Recreation Board. In 2013, he was named Activist of the Year by FreedomWorks. That year, he went undercover for Project Veritas, a conservative organization founded by James O'Keefe known for publishing deceptively edited videos...

[...]

On September 14, 2023, Fox News announced that Jones had been named a permanent co-host of Fox & Friends which saw Jones relinquish his weekend program.

There's more to the report, but all in all so it goes. Meanwhile, everybody makes mistakes, but the leading authority attributes this error to Jones:

In July 2019, Jones blamed the Barack Obama Administration for a lenient plea deal that sex offender and accused child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein received in 2008, incorrectly asserting that Obama was president at the time.

Whatever! Also, such errors may serve to recommend those who commit them to the suits at the Fox News Channel.

Jones became a regular weekday friend last fall. We've been disappointed by the direction his work has taken. Our view of his work would be this:

As time has passed, he has increasingly seemed to fashion himself as someone who knows everything there is to know about every conceivable topic on Earth, and as someone who's eager to share the three million things he knows. 

(Calchas was "the clearest by far of all the seers who scan the flight of birds?" So it was in Homer's day! Today, the Calchas role occasionally seems to have been passed on to Jones.)

At any rate, so it went this Sunday morning, when Jones scrambled to his feet to explain Trump's escape.

This newest friend is very young. We don't doubt his sincerity, but it seems to us that his "journalism" could frequently be a bit better.

We have different views of the various friends who staged Sunday morning's revival. 

Among the weekend program's three regular friends, Rachel Campos-Duffy strikes us as a million percent sincere. On occasion, the overtly and overly angry Pete Hegseth quite possibly does not.

As we've noted in the past, Will Cain strikes us as the weekend friend who tends to hold back when the other two friends have perhaps gone wild.  In our searches of Sunday's show, we didn't find any statements by Cain which merited inclusion in our report.

Jones serves as co-host on the weekday Fox & Friends program. In the profile we've posted above, we see the outline of a young person who has been a self-assured striver since youth.

Needless to say, there's nothing "wrong" with being a self-assured striver—until such time as there is.

On Sunday, Jones moved quickly to kick-start the framework—to take the discussion sectarian. As always, he seemed to be thoroughly sure of himself.

The New York Times won't report this sort of conduct on the Fox News Channel. Out here in Blue America, very few citizens understand how poorly they're being served by new orgs like the timorous Times—and even by the "favorite reporters and friends" who pander to their predispositions on our own nation's "cable news" channel.

Given our nation's rapidly spreading gong-show / meltdown—in the wake of last night's speech by the Palooka who's running ahead—we leave you today with a question:

Sacred Troy must die, Hector once prophetically said. 

As the "democratization of media" creates a deeply unintelligent modern-day Babel, is it possible that our American version of sacred Troy pretty much already has?

Who the heck is J.D. Vance?

THURSDAY, JULY 18, 2024

Also, what's in a word? Last night, Usha Vance introduced her husband, J. D. Vance, at the Republican National Convention.

We were struck by one part of her short introduction. More specifically, we were struck her inclusion of one particular word:

USHA VANCE (7/17/26): I met J. D. in law school when he was fresh out of Ohio State, which he attended with the support of the G.I. Bill. 

We were friends first, because, I mean, who wouldn't want to be friends with J. D.? 

He was then, as now, the most interesting person I knew—a working-class guy who had overcome childhood traumas that I could barely fathom to end up at Yale Law School.

A tough Marine who had served in Iraq, but whose idea of a good time was playing with puppies and watching the movie "Babe."

(LAUGHTER)

The most determined person I knew with one overriding ambition, to become a husband and a father, and to build the kind of tightknit family that he had longed for as a child.

We were struck by her reference to her husband's childhood "traumas." We recalled a bit of the puzzlement we felt when we speed-read Hillbilly Elegy, back when it first came out.

The book contained striking portraits of many of the major figure in Vance's life during his childhood and adolescence. The only portrait which seemed to be missing was a portrait of the young Vance himself.

What was he like as a 10-year-old child? What was he like in high school?

It seemed to us that such questions went unanswered and unexplored in Vance's best-selling book. Among an assortment of others, his mother and grandmother were sharply described. Vance himself seemed to be missing.

Something else is true about Hillbilly Elegy. The book describes a childhood and an adolescence which were filled with bad behavior by some of the people charged with care of the young person in question. We refer especially to Vance's mother, who was drug-addicted at the time, and to the various men with whom she was linked by romance and by marriage.

It would hardly be surprising to learn that this childhood and adolescence was indeed marked by trauma. Also this:

By the norms of high-end American politics, the man who emerged from that tumultuous youth has behaved in unusual ways over the past dozen years.

What can there be in a word? That one word in Usha Vance's introduction took our thoughts in many directions. For today, we'll offer this:

In some cases, the price to be paid for childhood abuse or neglect will be paid later on, somewhere down the road.

Her husband's childhood involved traumas (plural), we were told last night—childhood traumas of a type Usha Vance "can barely fathom." 

Remembering the song by Sonny Terry and Brownie McGhee—we were in high school when we bought the album!—we'll quickly recommend a world of pity for the motherless child. 

We'll recommend pity for the lost child. That said:

In his public life, if not in his family life, the adult who emerged from those traumas has turned out to be dismissively angry in recent years and has been quite erratic. Sometimes the wages of neglect emerge a ways down the road. 

FRIENDS: The friends gave thanks to "our lord and savior!"

THURSDAY, JULY 18, 2024

Duly recorded, for history: Long ago and far away, an Olympian intervened to save the life of one of her favorites.

The god in question was Athena, daughter of Zeus. As we noted yesterday, she intervened to save the life of Paris, the feckless Trojan prince who was on the verge of being killed in battle during the tenth year of the Achaeans' siege of Troy.

According to the western world's first great work of literature, Aphrodite whisked him away to his scented bedroom, where he was soon making love with his wife—with Helen, radiance of woman. Or at least, so many generations of Greeks were told as they listened to recitations of the war poem in question.

Today, experts claim that the Olympian gods never existed. Whatever your stance on that matter may be, we all can agree on this:

Last Saturday, a similar story began to spread concerning the apparent assassination attempt aimed at former president Donald J. Trump. 

One of the bullets clipped Trump's ear, drawing blood. It was an extreme near miss—and a story started to spread. As we noted yesterday, the New York Times reported the matter in a front-page report which started like this:

After Saturday, Trump’s Devotees See ‘God’s Protection’

For Donald J. Trump’s most devoted supporters, the bullet that nicked his ear and came within inches of ending his life was only further proof that a higher power is looking out for him.

“I don’t see this as luck,” said the Rev. Nathaniel Thomas, a Republican National Convention delegate and a pastor from the Washington, D.C., area. “I see this as God’s protection.”

Way back during the Late Bronze Age, Aphrodite had saved Paris. Last weekend, God saved former president Trump—extended his protection.

Many people said they believed this claim; there's no way to prove that it's "wrong." That said, a group of journalists on the Fox News Channel took things to the next level.

Today, bowing to the possibility that history will continue to exist, we're going to record some of the things these Fox News employees have said. 

We're referring to the various things that were said on Sunday morning's edition of Fox & Friends Weekend. In our view, the statements in question represent such a break from modern journalistic practice that they ought to be recorded—and high-end orgs like the New York Times simply aren't going to do that.

In our view, the story which follows includes a vast break from modern journalistic tradition. Five Fox journalists were involved in Sunday morning's discussion. The players in question are these

Co-hosts, Fox & Friends Weekend:
Rachel Campos-Duffy
Pete Hegseth
Will Cain

Co-hosts, Fox & Friends (regular weekday edition)
Lawrence B. Jones III
Ainsley Earhardt

The three weekend hosts were all present this day. They were broadcasting from a New York City studio. 

In the wake of Saturday's deadly event, they'd been joined by two of the co-hosts from the weekday Fox & Friends program. Jones and Earhardt were on the ground in Butler, Pa., at the scene of the previous day's events.

With that, we've listed the dramatis personae. Our story begins at 6:11 a.m. as Campos-Duffy throws to Jones, on the ground in Butler.

Campos-Duffy is an enormously warm and cheerful person. Somewhat oddly, she said this:

CAMPOS-DUFFY (7/14/24): Let's go to you, Lawrence. 

When Ronald Reagan was shot, he famously said, "I forgot to duck." In the case of Donald Trump, it's believed, from the video footage, that just his movement, and he missed it by—the bullet missed him by just a millimeter.

You're at the site of what our own medical correspondent, Dr. Siegel, is calling a medical miracle. What are you hearing there on the ground?

It's true! Earlier, Siegel had in fact referred to Trump's near-miss as "a medical miracle."

That was a peculiar turn of phrase. Inevitably, Campos-Duffy cited the peculiar remark—and Jones III, on the ground in Butler, now took things a giant step further:

JONES (continuing directly): I'll say this. We can talk about the medical miracle. We can talk about the duck [by Trump] and the split-second decision. 

But there is no Donald Trump today without Jesus Christ this morning. I mean, we could be having a very different conversation this morning—

CAMPOS-DUFFY: That's right.

JONES: —going over the obituary of the 45th president this morning. And if it wasn't for the grace of God, things could have been different. So I give honor and glory to our lord and savior, Jesus Christ, for protecting the former president. 

There it was, the start of the day's remarkable break from modern journalistic tradition. 

According to Jones, the miracle in question hadn't simply been realized through the grace of God.  Within the traditions of modern American speech, such a statement almost qualifies as secular. 

In his statement, Jones went several levels past that. He now gave honor and glory "to our lord and savior, Jesus Christ, for protecting the former president."

Campos-Duffy seemed to agree with Jones' formulation. As the morning proceeded, she would make the depth of her agreement clear.

Citizens, how about it? Had President Trump been afforded protection by Jesus Christ on the previous evening? 

There's no way to prove that he had! Also, there's no way to prove that he hadn't.

That said, Jones' statement had taken a turn which we would describe as sectarian. It wasn't just "the grace of God," or possibly even "divine providence, " which had allegedly saved the former president.

It was specifically "Jesus Christ, our lord and savior," who had intervened to provide this protection! Or at least, so Jones now said.

Whatever you think of that brand of journalism, it represents a startling break from the past. Through the course of the next three hours, this new paradigm was repeatedly advanced.

At 6:19 a.m., Campos-Duffy played videotape of former Speaker Newt Gingrich. When she did, this is where the discussion went:

CAMPOS-DUFFY: Last night, Newt Gingrich was on Sean Hannity, and here's what—he gives us a great historical perspective. Here's what he had to say about it:

GINGRICH (videotape): ...It was a very intimate moment for millions of Americans. And it was a providential moment. He had turned to look at that big screen, and when he was turned—the bullet would have hit him here [points to the side of his head]. When he turned back, it hit him here [points to his ear].

That's how close he came to being killed. And I think we need to understand that. This was providential, and he reacted appropriately.

CAMPOS-DUFFY: Yeah, it's a miracle!

HEGSETH: Providential.

CAMPOS-DUFFY: It's a miracle. And I told you guys earlier, I'm thinking more people pray over him, literally put their hands over him—there are many pictures of him in the Oval Office, and at many events, where, before then, people will pray over him. 

There is a protective shield over him. There's no question in my mind.

It was a miracle, the co-host said. Many people have prayed over Trump, she said. As a result, there is a protective shield over him. There's no question in her mind!

For the record, no such shield had protected Corey Comperatore that day. As they extended their theme this day, the friends never attempted to explain or discuss this fact.

At any rate, so it had gone, to our surprise, during the 6 o'clock hour. During the 7 o'clock hour, the general notions being developed continued to be fleshed out.

At 7:06 a.m., this exchange occurred:

CAMPOS-DUFFY: ...I know Dana Perino, our friend, said this is a warrior president. I think this is his Braveheart moment.

The strength! I mean, we've been talking all week, you guys, about a president with dementia and weak. And this is proof that age is not the question. 

It is about your strength and your stamina and your courage and boy, do you see that in those moments when he's fighting off those Secret Service agents to show the people that he intends to fight!

HEGSETH: It is indeed historic, and indeed providential, that we are on this couch, on-air this morning, with a former president that is alive...

Hegseth was doubling down on the idea that the near-miss had been "providential." At 7:16, Earhardt, on the ground in Butler, stepped in with this remark:

EARHARDT: You know, y'all brought up the fact that so many people have prayed for Donald Trump. God has really revealed a lot to us over the past few weeks with what's really happening behind closed doors at the White House...

In the midst of a set of absurd complaints from the other friends concerning minor points of real-time press coverage, Earhardt went on and on from there. In the process, she had now expanded the theme of the day:

According to Earhardt, God has been intervening to let us know what's really going on at the White House! 

Later in the hour, Earhardt returned to the day's basic recitation:

EARHARDT: Thankfully, the president turned his head at the right moment. God was protecting him and God was with him.

So it had gone in the 7 o'clock hour. Soon thereafter, at 8:09, the more sectarian part of the story was suddenly back:

HEGSETH: We're right, first and foremost, to thank Jesus Christ, the lord almighty, that Donald Trump is safe—

CAMPOS-DUFFY: Yeah.

HEGSETH: —and those prayers went out, and to reflect on the historic nature of this. But you quickly move to how in the world did someone get that close with a high-powered rifle?

We were back to pure sectarian—to sectarian all the way down. According to Hegseth, "Jesus Christ, the lord almighty," had intervened to keep Donald Trump safe. 

No one else's God had done that! Hegseth was thanking the specific God recognized within his own particular faith, perhaps within his own particular sect.

Jesus Christ had now been specifically thanked two times. During the 9 o'clock hour, Campos-Duffy got the theme started again:

CAMPOS-DUFFY: There's another amazing picture in this photo. You can see the bullet whizzing past Trump's head where it then grazes his ear. 

I mean, it's just a remarkable photo, and a sign of what so many believe is true about Donald Trump, that he is under a special protection because of the millions of people who have been praying for him and praying to Jesus, praying to angels, praying to the Holy Spirit to put a shield around him. 

We had Dr. Siegel on earlier, and he said this is just almost a 99% impossibility that that bullet did not enter into his head. But for a millimeter of him turning his head, right now we would be sitting on the couch talking about an assassinated former president. It's really miraculous.

Why had the former president been under a special protection? Simple! Because so many people had been praying to Jesus!

(In this case, Campos-Duffy also mentioned angels and the Holy Spirit. That may have made her statement less sectarian, depending on how you score it.)

By 9:30, it was time for Jones III to stage a curtain call. Three hours earlier, it was Jones who had kick-started this unusual "news analysis." Having interviewed a pair of eyewitnesses, the weekday friend now offered this:

JONES: Powerful statement here. Renee, Ron—  As you can see, it's deeply emotional for these folks. 

Renee, this is thirty-two for you? Thirty-two rallies that she's been to! And as I said earlier in the program at the 6 a.m. hour, if it wasn't for the lord Jesus Christ, our lord and savior, we would probably be talking about obituary for the former president of the United States.

Guys, I send it back to you in New York City.

CAMPOS-DUFFY: Thank you, Lawrence.

"Thank you, Lawrence," Campos-Duffy said. And with that, it was accomplished.

Should friends let friends discuss news this way? In the end, that's a matter of judgment.

That's a matter of judgment! But according to this like-minded collection of friends, Donald J. Trump had avoided death thanks to our lord and savior Jesus Christ—thanks to Jesus Christ, the lord almighty. 

This remarkable presentation stretched through four long hours of this major news show. Thanks to our lord and savior, the former president has been furnished with a miraculous protective shield.  

There was no doubt in the one friend's mind, and that friend is a very warm person. Meanwhile:

For whatever reason, Corey Comperatore had not been gifted with any such miraculous aid. Neither had two other attendees who had been critically wounded.

Journalistically, this struck us as a remarkable morning—as a giant break from contemporary practice. You won't read about this in the Times—or anywhere else, as far as that goes.

More thoughts on this topic tomorrow.

Tomorrow: Changes...