SHORT WEEK/SHARP DECLINE: A warning from Blow!


Part 1—Katie McDonough knows all:
To her credit, Katie McDonough knows everything.

We were struck by this fact all over again when we turned to Salon this morning.

The youngish McDonough is billed as “Salon's politics writer, focusing on gender, sexuality and reproductive justice.” That said, she also seems to know everything about pretty much everything else.

In this morning’s revelations, she knows what would have been fair and just in the case of Michel Brown—and in the case of Marissa Alexander.

Her descriptions of these cases may seem a bit selective to some, but she knows what would have been fair and just. Not long ago, we marveled at her apparent omniscience concerning NFL personnel issues.

In tribal culture, tribal priests will emerge with these types of omniscience. At the start of yesterday’s column, Charles Blow warned us liberals about the things we must never let ourselves think:
BLOW (11/24/14): Bigger Than Immigration

Don’t let yourself get lost in the weeds. Don’t allow yourself to believe that opposition to President Obama’s executive actions on immigration is only about that issue, the president’s tactics, or his lack of obsequiousness to his detractors.

This hostility and animosity toward this president is, in fact, larger than this president. This is about systems of power and the power of symbols. Particularly, it is about preserving traditional power and destroying emerging symbols that threaten that power. This president is simply the embodiment of the threat, as far as his detractors are concerned, whether they are willing or able to articulate it as such.
According to Blow, Obama’s detractors may not be able to articulate their motives and beliefs. But he started his column by telling us what we mustn’t “allow ourselves to believe.”

According to Blow, we mustn’t allow ourselves to believe “that opposition to President Obama’s executive actions on immigration is only about that issue, the president’s tactics, or his lack of obsequiousness to his detractors.”

In individual cases, are we allowed to wonder about that possibility? No directive was issued by Blow, but we’ll guess that such thoughts are discouraged.

In his rather fuzzy formulations, Blow was saying that we should never trust the good faith of The Others. As he continued, he warned us about who they are:
BLOW (continuing directly): A Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll last week found that the public “wants immigration policy along the lines of what President Barack Obama seeks but is skeptical of the executive action.” When The Journal looked at some of the people who “say they want to see a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants—which is beyond what Mr. Obama’s executive order would do—but say they disapprove of presidential executive action,” it found that the group was “overwhelmingly white and more likely to be Republican than not” and some said that they simply “don’t like anything associated with the president.”
Those Obama detractors!

They were “overwhelmingly white,” Blow said. And not only that:

They were “more likely to be Republican than not,” we were underwhelmingly told. “Some” detractors said they simply don’t like Obama at all!

Questions: How white is overwhelmingly white? Blow didn’t say.

How likely were the detractors to be Republican? How many of those people was “some?” Those questions went unanswered too.

For those who wish to check Blow’s work, he linked to this underwhelming analysis piece by the Wall Street Journal. The Journal had spoken to seventy-six people “who said they want to see immigration reform happen but don’t like the idea of Mr. Obama acting alone.”

Warning! In the context of polling and surveys, seventy-six is a rather small number. What percentage of those people were white? We weren’t told, whether by Blow or by the Journal itself.

That said, the Journal quoted nine of these detractors—four Republicans, three Democrats and two independents. Truth to tell, you can’t learn a huge amount from Blow’s link.

You can start to learn about Blow as he continues his piece. He quickly gave us a crafty warning about Those Whom We Must Never Trust:
BLOW (continuing directly): Pay attention to the overall response from all sources, particularly the rhetoric in which it is wrapped.

Speaker John Boehner has accused Obama of acting like a “king” and an “emperor.” Representative Louie Gohmert referred to Obama’s “ new royal amnesty decree.”
Pay attention to all sources, Blow advised. The gentleman continued from there, cherry-picking his sources.

Meanwhile, did you notice something Blow left out? His readers were asked to be very afraid about Boehner’s reference to Obama being an “emperor.” Blow forgot to say where that language started—with Obama himself!

Blow’s column is a good example of our descent into tribal culture. Before he was done, he even reminded us (hint, hint) that “most of [the founding fathers] owned slaves at some point.”

Weirdly, he included a graphic derived from the NBC News/WSJ survey in which only 43 percent of Latinos approve of what Obama did. Please don’t allow yourselves to trust the motives of Latinos!

Thanks to Thanksgiving, this will be a short week—a short week in which we’ll explore our journalistic culture’s rather sharp decline.

Tomorrow: A new world record

Blow by the numbers:
Blow included only one graphic with his column. It showed that Democrats were much more likely than Republicans to approve of Obama’s plan.

But how odd! Beneath that (rather low) number for Latinos, Blow included this note:
Note from NBC News: “The sample size here is small (just 110 Latino respondents), so the numbers have a high margin of error.”
Why would you choose to highlight a number with a high margin of error? Because our upper-end journalism is imitation? Because it’s essentially faux?


  1. OMB (3 Conductors, 25 Sacks of Mail, and OTB)

    BOB has had a few days to catch up on the major stories dominating the rapidly changing media landscape, the world of American journalism that is changing before our eyes.

    And who does he start with? Katie Donough at Salon. Well, she is only described here as "youngish." Once, when he was younger and energetic Bob labeled here thusly in the space of a few short lines in one post:

    "Our McCarthyistic culture lord ....With her R-bombs and M-bombs at her side, McDonough’s a budding Stalinist and a rambling wreck."

    In tribal culture, tribal priests will emerge with these types of omniscience.

    1. I don't know about any of that nonsense. But I did read McDonough's piece.

      So I do know what she said, what she claims to know.

      She does know what would have been fair and just: an indictment. No indictment is unfair, she says.

      She also knows that Wilson would have "walked" even if indicted.

      How she knows all this, she doesn't say.

      Well, she does say "the system" is "racist." Which I suppose explains everything!

      News flash! Yes, The System IS racist. However, that fact has almost no explanatory power in individual cases.

      Why didn't this grand jury indict?

      Saying it's because of "the system" says nothing. In that way, it's quite a bit like a comment by ZKoD.

    2. Prompted I presume by Somerby, you read McDonough's piece.

      "So I do know what she said, what she claims to know," you said. "That said, she also seems to know everything about pretty much everything else," said Bob." You say she said nothing.

      Bob seems to cover everything Salon posts
      written by Katie McDonough, whom he says knows everything but whom you say says nothing.

      I'd say KZ pretty much got it right. About both you and Bob.

    3. Anonymous @ 12:41 thanks for telling us what Bob and left out. I was curious why he chose to make her article the lede on a piece about Charles Blow. It was a bit fuzzy until you cleared it up.

  2. Bob, desperate for readers, is back to race-baiting.

    1. Readers, not at all desperate, failed to take the bait.

  3. As much as I deeply respect the thoughts and writing of Bob Somerby, I am greatly disturbed by the failure of the Grand Jury to indict on any count of actionable behavior. It gives the strong appearance of being a travesty of justice, and I respect Somerby enough to be waiting for him to clarify his response to the Ferguson Grand Jury's lack of finding.

    1. It has no such appearance to anyone who knows the facts and has an IQ above 90

    2. Read the transcript and then decide.

  4. The Salon scribe, Katie McDonough, was "youngish" Bob's readers were told.

    Question: How young is "youngish"? BlowBob didn’t say.

  5. So if Dr. Brave specialize in all this following spell you listed, how come we keep getting testimony only about the love ones?

    I want here about the lottery spell.

  6. IMHO a policeman should have been able to deal with Brown without using lethal force. I hope police departments throughout the country find ways to do their job without killing people.

    But, one should not ignore Michael Brown's bizarre behavior. Earlier that day he had robbed a handful of cigarillos form a convenience store and roughed up the clerk. He couldn't have escaped punishment, since it was caught on video. There seems little doubt that he tussled with Officer Darren Wilson when Wilson was in the police car. At least one witness said Brown was fatally shot when he put his head down and charged at Wilson.

    I don't know why Michael Brown behaved this way. IMHO people of good will ought to think about how to deter this sort of behavior.

    1. How would you deal with someone of that size charging you, who moments earlier tried to take your gun?

    2. Or so the 6-4, 210 pound Wilson says. But let's believe every word he says. After all, why would he lie? All he did was empty his service revolver on broad daylight on a residential street on an unarmed kid.

      Why we all know how helpless white cops are.

    3. Don't you mean Officer Wilson and the eyewitnesses who testified that "The big kid kept charging at him like a football player?"

    4. D in C, it might be more practical to train young people not to charge at cops and shove store clerks they're stealing from.

    5. That was according to Officer Wilson's testimony to the grand jury. Is it consistent with his incident report?

    6. One eyewitness said that Brown charged at Wilson. One. Now that becomes several "eyewitnesses."

      And this eyewitness first said he was 100 yards away, but when that wasn't close enough, changed it to 50 yards.

      Bob is right. We do cherry-pick what fits what we already "know" don't we? And Bob and his fan club are the worst offenders of that.

      I guess that's easier than hearing all the evidence and thinking it over.

    7. One used the term "charged" but others said he was coming toward Wilson. Those witnesses were also African American and their testimony was more consistent with the physical evidence than the alternative accounts.

    8. let's face it, the life of a black teen has no value in the USA.
      If you're a cop and you kill one, you don't even need to fill out an incident report.

    9. Anon 12:02 - evidence of that "I have no argument, but still" assertion please?

    10. The blood evidence at the scene show the last shots have Brown 8-10 feet from Wilson. Sorry Sharpton fans, onto the next fake racist story. Your dream is to find many true incidents of racist killings by whites against blacks. Some day you just might uncover one that actually happened.

  7. Progressives at Salon and CNN and MSNBC are hard at work producing another generation of malevolent thugs who steal from and shove store clerks and beat up and charge at cops and end up dead before their 20th birthday. Too bad, since so many of them would otherwise turn out to be happy and productive people. But it must be done, out of compassion, says the braindead white progressive.

    1. Who had more influence on Brown? Progressive media, white institutions, or his parents?

    2. Here's one person's sort-of answer to that question

      Rather, Martin and Brown were victims of an African-American culture in which the family has been pretty much destroyed, government checks have largely replaced employment, education is disparaged, criminality is respected, and racial animosity is a sign of authenticity. That culture has worked well for the Democratic Party, but it has been an utter disaster for millions of young black men like Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown.

    3. All those articles on extra snake penises do lead youth astray @ 8:11, but those kids at MSNBC have no ratings, as Bob has pointed out, and they don't care about black kids enough to mention them, much less influence them.

      You may be right about CNN, though. I haven't watched them much since they were the Clinton New Network back in the 90's.

      Stick around. You are obviously new but Bob is glad to have you even if he doesn't know you are here.

    4. MSNBC doesn't influence black kids directly, it serves white progressives whose identities depend on making sure that a black kid who has any hope loses it and doesn't mistake this country for one he should like living in. All done in the name of progress.

      As soon as the millions of new ethnic immigrants are secure in their amnesty and the millions more who want to come here make it in, white progressives will get to work teaching them how bad it is to be them in America.

    5. I would guess if Salon examined you they would find more than one penis. Not sure how many, but my bet is they would all be small.

  8. Before we determine whether a person who roughs up a store clerk is a bully and a thug we need to know if the clerk was gay and if the massive sized attacker is white or black.

    1. We need first to ask why the concerned citizen who called the police from the store did not have his/her own concealed weapon and save taxpayers the expense of this prolonged grand jury investigation.

    2. The grand jury investigation wasn't necessary. McCullough simply lacked the balls not to charge Wilson, so he passed the buck to the grand jury which -- Surprise! -- came out with the outcome McCullough wanted.

    3. Most of the defense attorneys discussing this agree that there was insufficient evidence against Wilson. It would be dismissed at the preliminary hearing and never go to a jury.

    4. I suspect that your extensive polling of defense attorneys revealed agreement that there was insufficient evidence against Wilson for a conviction. There isn't a preliminary hearing after a grand jury indictment, at least not in Missouri. A preliminary hearing establishes whether there's probable cause to think the accused committed the crime. The grand jury indictment would have already established that.

    5. Defense attorneys can't poke gigantic holes in the story from a guy about the victim "going for his waistband", yet also not thinking about whether the victim had a gun?

      Defense attorneys can't ask why the cop said he was punched twice in the face so hard (by a guy as strong as Hulk Hogan), and hit so hard he thought the next punch might be fatal, yet had no more than a bruise on his face?

      They can't get the cop to explain why never filled out an incident report? Or why the accused drove away after the incident in the vehicle where the incident occurred?

      Defense attorneys suck at their jobs.

  9. I read Wilsons testimony. It's fantastic.

    1. I liked the Hulk Hogan part the best.

  10. Bob quotes Blow quoting the WSJ, and then blames Blow for what the WSJ said, for research that the WSJ did, for the absence of data that the WSJ did not provide. We continue to be surprised by Bob's increasing decline. Not for the first time, we urge him to find something that he is interested in enough to do well at. What he is doing now clearly is not that thing. On the bright side, we suspect our capacity to be surprised by Bob's increasing sloppy disinterest is exhausted.

    1. Rachel Maddow etc, I continue to be surprised why you along with an undetermined number of others keep reading the g-d blog if you think it's so sucky - are you a masochist? Or just have too much time on your hands?

    2. RM's Faces, Bob wrote:

      "Weirdly, he included a graphic derived from the NBC News/WSJ survey in which only 43 percent of Latinos approve of what Obama did."

      Weirdly Bob failed to note the poll was taken before
      Obama did anything.

    3. I read this blog for the same reason Bob writes it. I like to pretend I'm intellectually to both him and the people who have ceded their critical thinking skills over to him. And both he and people like you make it easy.

      Besides, there is also much sport in reading you cry and whine when someone interrupts your privileged white boy wolrd view like the little pussy bitch you are.

    4. I thought you were just attracted to it a work written by people like you about people like you.


  11. Hello, my name is Miss faith, I'm from USA. I want to inform you all that there is a spell caster that is genuine and real. I never really believed in any of these things but when I was losing Garvin, I needed help and somewhere to turn badly. I found consultant.odia spells and i ordered a LOVE SPELL. Several days later, my phone rang. Garvin was his old self again and wanted to come back to me! Not only come back, the spell caster opened him up to how much I loved and needed him. Spell Casting isn't brainwashing, but they opened his eyes to how much we have to share together. I recommend anyone who is in my old situation to try it. It will bring you a wonderful surprises as well as your lover back to you. The way things were meant to be." you can contact the spell caster on he's very nice and great.