GEOGRAPHY OF THE CRAZY: Governor Bentley's sex tape again!


Part 4—One modern strain of The Crazy:
In the future, if there is a future, geographers, if such people exist, will examine the geologic strata of the craziness which seized control of American discourse at least by 1992.

If they exist, they'll pick through the various geologic strata of The Crazy. At some point, embarrassed, chagrined, they'll be forced to discuss what happened again last night.

During the era in question, did Louis C. K. make people watch him masturbate over and over again? Apparently yes, he did.

Somewhat similarly, the geographers will have to explain the role of the Governor Bentley sex tape, which cable viewers, just last night, were forced to confront again.

In this case, the purveyor of The Crazy was a major cable news star who shall go unnamed. She has risen to the top through her "performance of the [Name Withheld] figure," or so the ridiculous Janet Malcolm has ever so weirdly said.

C. K., who we tinily semi-knew long ago, has long been engaged in his performance of the Louie figure. At times, he's produced superlative work. He's also produced a large amount of transparent "startle laugh" crap.

Last night, the unnamed cable star in question returned to the Governor Bentley sex tape for perhaps the ten millionth time. In this way, her liberal viewers were again exposed to The Crazy, disordered and ill.

If there actually is a future, historians will marvel at the fact that liberals weren't able to see The Crazy when it came at them from this corporate source. They'll marvel at the fact that liberals couldn't spot The Crazy in this cable star's work. They'll link this to an even larger point of amazement:

They'll note the fact that liberals couldn't spot the spread of The Crazy, not until The Crazy adopted the form of one Donald J. Trump.

They couldn't or wouldn't see The Crazy when it was performed by Chris Matthews in his endless attacks on "today's man-woman," Candidate Al Gore. They couldn't or wouldn't see The Crazy when Matthews kept sliming Hillary Clinton, then the nation's first lady, in blatantly misogynistic ways. (Nurse Ratched! Evita Peron!)

They couldn't or wouldn't see The Crazy when the children pretended that Hillary Clinton had been performing seances. Later, they had oodles of fun when she said, apparently accurately, that she had rooted for the Cubs and the Yankees when she was a child.

They couldn't see The Crazy when the children of the corporate press slimed Naomi Wolf within an inch of her life. (Earth tones! Alpha male!) They couldn't see it when the children kept playing that funny videotape of the extremely funny Asian people at the Buddhist temple, where nothing actually happened, in spite of what Matthews said.

They couldn't see it when the children announced their love for Gennifer Flowers, for whose truthfulness they stood in line to vouch.

In 1995, Flowers had written this about her first glimpse of Hillary Clinton: "I was shocked. She looked like a big fat frump with her hair hanging down kind of curly and wavy. She had big, thick glasses; an ugly dress; and a big, fat butt."

Four years later, liberals couldn't see the existence of The Crazy when Matthews fawned to this person for half an hour, for example like this:
MATTHEWS (8/2/99): Well, Mrs. Clinton has offered herself up in a new role. For a long time she offered herself as the new Eleanor Roosevelt. She channeled with her; she apparently talked to her.

I'm just kidding here. But she has clearly tried to model herself after that great first lady, liberal first lady of Franklin Roosevelt's. And now it seems like she's offering herself in a new role, as a kind of a person who's had a therapeutic role in life. Her job is to take care of a delinquent, someone with psychological problems that she's had to fix or deal with or accept or maintain, or whatever you will, not as particularly a political partner, which was a role she offered up before. You know, you get two for the price of one. Now you get a nurse for the price of the patient, all right? What do you think about her offering herself as Nurse Ratched to the cuckoo's nest here?


You know, I gotta pay a little tribute here. You're a very beautiful woman, and I, and I have to tell you, he knows that, you know that, and everybody watching knows that; Hillary Clinton knows that. How can a woman put up with a relationship between her husband and somebody, anybody, but especially somebody like you that's a knockout? I don't quite get this relationship.

FLOWERS: Gosh, you make me blush here. I'm telling you, I'll tell you, this—

MATTHEWS: It's an objective statement, Gennifer. I'm not flirting.
Three years later, he was still selling the seance! Beyond that, he was kissing the ascot of the very beautiful woman who had so thoughtfully described the "big, fat butt" of the first lady, who was also the world's most gigantic lesbo, according to his knockout guest.

(For the record, we know of no evidence that Flowers' claim of a torrid, 12-year love affair with "my Bill" was in any way accurate. The children all pretended that he had confessed, much as the children are doing this week with one of their newest targets.)

Future historians will note the fact that liberals couldn't spot The Crazy in Matthews' relentless crazy behavior. Later, they couldn't see it when Keith Olbermann kept airing his smutty misogyny with Michael Musto, his smutty little pal.

Rather, than did see it in that instance, and they discussed his misogyny by name. But they only did so in private, not in public, where their careers might have been affected. Geographers will name the names of the horrible "career liberals" who, in this inexcusable way, permitted The Crazy to spread.

If a future exists after Trump, historians will discuss the way The Crazy routinely spread on page one of the New York Times. They'll discuss the way the liberal world rolled over and died when the Times ran its 4400-word, Bannon-funded, absurdly crackpot "news report" about the scary uranium deal in April 2015, thereby attacking Candidate Clinton in the latest crazy way.

They'll discuss the way that insane report met with zero "resistance" from the fiery TV stars of the career liberal world. They'll discuss the way those same TV stars rolled over and died in 2012 as the Benghazi fables were being assembled.

They'll discuss the way these stars rolled over and died four years later, when James B. Comey, Comey the God, launched his astounding attack on Candidate Hillary Clinton. The fiery stars were too afraid to challenge the famous god's conduct.

In all these discussions, these future historians, if such people exist, will discuss the transparent craziness of our unnamed cable news star.

They'll discuss the fervent way she kept vouching for Matthews, the greatest cable purveyor of The Crazy during the Clinton-Gore years (and one of our greatest misogynists). They'll discuss the fervent way she vouched for Greta Van Susteren (her drinking pal), the Fox News Channel's leading enabler of Donald J. Trump's birtherism.

What kind of person does things like that? With humanity exceeding our own, they'll try to sort that out. Beyond that, they'll discuss the way the liberal rank and file couldn't see the problem with the crazy behavior by this unnamed major star.

Mostly, though, they'll discuss the times when her craziness took center stage under the brightest lights. Last night was the latest such night. Enabled by the report about Roy Moore, the unnamed star, C.K. style, returned to the scene of her repetitive crime.

Good God! She played the Bentley sex tape again, saying we needed to hear it! As she did, she employed all her performance hooks, in which she covers her eyes like a little girl, pretending she can't bear to see (or hear) what can be heard on that horrifying tape.

There was zero reason to play the tape, but that's how past traumatization forces the damaged to work. Not unlike C. K., the unnamed star seems to need some sort of help. Instead, historians will explain that she was a corporate cable star, and that, like Donald J. Trump, she played an active role in spreading The Crazy and normalizing its parts.

You can watch the cable star playing her little girl game right here. Below, you see the transcript of last night's compulsive performance, in which her clowning was helped along by an audience which seemed to be composed of giggling teen-aged girls:
MADDOW (11/9/17): (Ridiculous, crazy transcript to follow, if it's ever published)
Again, you can watch her C.K.-like performance of the Rachel figure by just clicking here.

If history survives Donald J. Trump, geologic strata of The Crazy will come under embarrassed review. At this site, we've endlessly posted past transcripts in which The Crazy has reigned.

Everyone else has agreed that those manifestations shouldn't be discussed. Instead, we liberals pretend that The Crazy arrived with Donald J. Trump.

Our story is crazily bogus. We think of the Cummings poem, little tree:
look the spangles
that sleep all the year in a dark box
dreaming of being taken out and allowed to shine,
the balls the chains red and gold the fluffy threads,

put up your little arms
and i'll give them all to you to hold
every finger shall have its ring
and there won't be a single place dark or unhappy
"the balls the chains red and gold the fluffy threads?" Let's borrow that beautiful meter! In this case, it's the chaits the drums the various players dumb and/or dishonest who have refused to tell the rank and file about The Crazy's spread.

Today, our tribe pretends it started with Trump. We're very much like the innocent children adorning their little tree.

Last night, an unnamed multimillionaire put her hands over her eyes (again) and pretended that she couldn't see or hear the very bad words on that audiotape. It's what she persistently does when she plays the Bentley sex tape, which she seems to love.

The unnamed star was pretending that she was a child. This unnamed star could use some help. So could the liberal world, which agreed to normalize The Crazy long before Trump came along.

Go ahead—watch that tape! Will your lizard let you see the truth? Will your lizard let you see that you're looking at a major steward of The Crazy, whose vines, after all these lunatic years, have basically strangled the world?

She vouches for Matthews; she vouched for Greta. She hid from Benghazi, then from Comey.

She mugs and clowns and entertains us. What kind of horrible person does this?

What kind of person behaves this way? We'll suggest that you read the Times report about whatever is wrong with that other damaged soul, Louis C. K.

Go ahead—watch the tape! Just as light from distant stars permits us to "look back in time," you'll be looking back through one key strand of your nation's deeply disabling Crazy.

Take a good look around, Springsteen said. This is your home town.


  1. Roy Moore is a big problem for the Republicans. IMHO the accusations against him are true. It's too late to replace him on the ballot. So, he will simply deny the charges. There's no way now to absolutely confirm them. I think he still has a good chance to be elected. I only hope that the Senate will throw him out or that he will voluntarily resign from the Senate.

    1. In the 1960's, supposedly a time of sexual anything goes, I was 18 but looked younger. During my first year in college, men in the 30s would attend the campus dances and attach themselves to young girls. They offered sex in terms of an educational experience to girls with little sexual experience. One man took me to a bar on a date. As we walked in, other men made rude comments to him about jail bait and cradle robbing, etc. He immediately walked me out of there. I think these men were pedophiles trying to stay within the letter of the law, since they were deliberately choosing the younger looking girls. I recall feeling flattered, as one of Roy Moore's dates describes, and I definitely didn't know what was going on. I said no to their propositions, but I asked them if that approach ever worked and one said yes, as often as not.

      My point here is that other men considered this wrong behavior and exerted pressure on the predators by ostracizing them. These guys know they are doing something wrong. The girls would be protected by a father or brother or younger guys, if they were not isolated on a college campus. If I were not new and had close girl friends, they might have wised me up and prevented acceptance of such dates.

      There is nothing normal about what Roy Moore did, nothing innocent. It is calculated and it is unfair to the women involved, and observers are right to recoil from it and treat him like the pedophile he most likely is, regardless of the age of his dates and legal age of consent in the South. This is unacceptable behavior, especially in someone elected to make and uphold the law. The Senate will not throw him out and he won't resign, for partisan reasons. It is up to the voters to do that.

    2. I only hope that the Senate will throw him out or that he will voluntarily resign from the Senate.

      Isn't that precious. And then the new republican governor of Alabama can appoint another good republican to take the Senate seat. And

      Through despair and hope
      Through faith and love
      Till we find our place
      On the path unwinding
      In the circle
      The circle of life

      But sorry, Comrade DinC. I have to flag you on this one for gross hypocrisy.

      1. "you can grab them by the pussy"
      2. “Before a show, I’ll go backstage and everyone’s getting dressed, and everything else, and you know, no men are anywhere, and I’m allowed to go in because I’m the owner of the pageant and therefore I’m inspecting it,” he said. “You know, I’m inspecting because I want to make sure that everything is good.”
      “You know, they’re standing there with no clothes. ‘Is everybody okay?’” he continued. “And you see these incredible looking women, and so, I sort of get away with things like that.”

      According to interviews BuzzFeed News conducted with former Miss Teen USA contestants, Trump did just that in 1997. Four women who were competing in the pageant that year — including one who was 15 at the time — recalled that Trump walked into the dressing area while they were changing.

      One of them called it “shocking” and “creepy” and said she rushed to cover herself. Another recalled that the contestants were “just scrambling to grab stuff… whatever garments they had.”

      Another called it “really shocking,” saying, “We were all naked.”

      “I remember putting on my dress really quick because I was like, ‘Oh my god, there’s a man in here,’” Mariah Billado, former Miss Vermont Teen USA, said.

      Knowing that, you still voted for that pervert, DinC. Sorry, you need to go back in the penalty box, away civilized society. I'll let you know when you can come out.

    3. Does anyone have any idea of what a "pedophile" is?

      Apparently now it's older guys (since when is early 30s old?) going after college girls.

      Talk about "the crazy." And the dishonest.

    4. “going after college girls”

      The language of the predator. No wonder you don’t understand what is wrong.

    5. "Going after college girls" is the common expression for it.

      Nice try with the phony culpability. And -- to ask the question again -- how is it "pedophilia" for these 30 year olds to be interested in them?

      Here's a hint -- it's not pedophilia. So why all the phony exaggeration? What need is being served here with the use of that term?

    6. Compare "hebephilia" [sexual interest in pubescents/early-adolescents, typically 11-to-14-year-olds] and "ephebophilia" [sexual interest in/preference for mid-to-late adolescents, typically 15-to-19-year-olds] to "pedophilia" [sexual interest in PRE-pubescents/PRE-teens].

      The odd thing is, the same people who insist on carelessly misusing the word "pedophilia" will also accuse those who use it correctly of being enablers or even committers of child molestation.

    7. Men who are attracted to very young girls are referred to as "sexually inadequate" by psychologists.

      Your argument reminds me of someone who insists that it is wrong to call a poodle a dog.

    8. Anon @ 9:37am: Category Error, that's not the nature of the objection, but you do actually offer an idea for a good example: poodles come in three varieties (breeds), the Standard Poodle, Miniature Poodle and Toy Poodle. It is wrong to call a Miniature Poodle a Toy Poodle. It remains wrong no matter how much you insist both are small so both are the same, and it is only a "pedantic" or "ridiculous distinction", "without a difference".

  2. There is a difference between Maddow and Matthews here.

    Maddow plays the actual recording of Bentley, who was eventually forced to resign over it. Matthews is pimping a false story (and coming on to his guest).

    At any rate, she was discussing the whole bizarro Alabama mess, starting with Bentley, then Strange, and now Moore. It's a fascinating story of the corruption that happens when only one party controls everything, and of the hypocrisy of the blind partisans running the show. Isn't it a little bit instructive about the depths of hyper-partisanship?
    Or, you can obsess over Maddow's mugging.

    1. Hyper-partisanship?

      You mean like the MSNBC crowd? I agree with Somerby here -- I find them completely appalling. And I'm seriously left wing.

      This latest sex-scold, holier-than-thou nonsense is really the last straw. Doesn't (for instance) the MSNBC crowd have to hold Bill Clinton to the same standard of evidence that they're applying to Moore.

      Meaning Gennifer Flowers and Paula Jones MUST be believed as well. They said lots of things "on the record"!

    2. Moore's accuser is being believed because she has corroboration. Flowers claims didn't stand up to scrutiny.

    3. Plenty of people thought they were corroborating those ridiculous accusations against Clinton. Remember those two highway patrolmen?

      And there's no corroboration of evidence in the Moore charges. Just verification of the hearsay.

    4. The strongest corroboration is that he has admitted dating 16 year olds, with their mother's permission, of course.

    5. Which a) has nothing to do with the 14-year-old's story, and b) is, unfortunately or not, legal in Alabama.

      This attempt to bolster the claims of illegal conduct with stories about legal conduct that wasn't at all the same is pretty weak tea.

      Let's see what comes out now from others. If there's a flood of similar stories a la Kevin Spacey, then Moore has a problem. There should certainly be.

      But if there isn't, then his accusers do. It raises questions about the nature and timing of the one seriously culpable story.

    6. What he did is morally distasteful and marks him as unfit for office.

      Today he asks why these women waited 40 years, why now?

      1. The climate suggests they might be believed now.
      2. Moore is not running for circuit judge, a job with limited impact, but for a job with much bigger impact on people’s lives.
      3. The public deserves to know who Moore really is.
      4. There is a rising public opinion against child marriage. Women, in partcular, think this should no longer be legal. These child marriage laws are being challenged and changed all over the US (and worldwide).

    7. @Anon 10:47pm:

      "Doesn't (for instance) the MSNBC crowd have to hold Bill Clinton to the same standard of evidence that they're applying to Moore."

      I didn't realize Bill Clinton was on the ballot this year.

      Mitt Romney is calling for Moore to step down. Is Romney part of the MSNBC crowd?

      Also, what is that "standard of evidence" that you think isn't being met in the Moore case?

  3. "Again, you can watch her C.K.-like performance of the Rachel figure by just clicking here."

    I'm not going to watch it, obviously, but I'm sure it's not "C.K.-like performance". She's making money; it's business, not pleasure.

    And you, Bob, would do well by analyzing who's paying her to do this, and why. Serious amounts of money are spent to keep this orgy of hatred and propaganda on the air...

    1. If you really "followed the money", you'd understand why an "Anti-establishment" guy like Trump appointed a bunch of grifters to his cabinet.

    2. Like the oligarchs in the Trump administration or your oligarch bosses in Moscow ?

  4. "Enabled by the report about Roy Moore, the unnamed star, C.K. style, returned to the scene of her repetitive crime."

    It is almost as if Somerby is trying to normalize what Louis C.K. did by comparing him to Maddow. These comparisons go both ways, and what Louis C.K. did is not normal. It is bona fide sexual harassment.

    It is inappropriate to psychoanalyze Louis C.K. or Rachel Maddow. Maddow is enacting her shtick as a performance whereas C.K. did his worst in real life, to real people who were just trying to do their jobs. We have no idea how Maddow behaves in real life, but her point may have been that Bentley's behavior is unfit as a role model for children, for all we know. She is using her behavior to say his behavior is inappropriate, because we get tired of hearing the same words over and over. I see nothing wrong with it.

    Louis C.K.'s behavior was aimed at women who were themselves trying to pursue a career in comedy. They were his rivals, not just women who happened to be where he was. This kind of hazing keeps women out of lucrative occupations and it happens in many fields, enacted as a power and dominance move, using sex as a weapon to keep women out of higher paying jobs.

    I think Louis C.K. has learned to use sex to shock people on his show and as part of his stand up act. But he uses sex to diminish women who threaten him in real life, not for gratification but as a weapon. That's why what he does is illegal and wrong, and should not be dismissed as pitiful or perverted. His act is about business too.

    Somerby doesn't seem to care about that. His main focus is on making Maddow appear to be a hypocrite by behaving like a sex criminal toward Bentley, while showing his tape (Somerby doesn't mention that it was in the context of describing all of the sex allegations). Louis C.K. committed a crime. Rachel did not.

    Moore may or may not have committed a crime, but he clearly doesn't belong in a job where he will make laws affecting women's well-being. He has a huge blind spot there. So does Bob Somerby. But what else is new?

    1. Although he is occasionally correct about Maddow's reporting, Somerby long ago crossed over from objective criticism to personal animus regarding her, and his arguments therefore carry little weight with anyone whom he might like to persuade. And this leads him to the bizarre equating of Louis CK's (alleged) sexual assault with Maddow's reporting of a story.
      Her presentation last night was truthful, I might add.

    2. I actually think that was a good piece of journalism last night by Maddow. I do agree that she probably overplayed the recordings of Bentley. However she tied it all up very nicely.

      That's quite a nice little circle jerk they have going down there in Alabama, home of "real Americans".

    3. And they're real big on "family values" in 'Bammy.

    4. "family values", like "heartland of America" just means "white".

    5. I don't consider jacking off in front of women after asking them if he could do it to be "sexual harassment."

      Jerky, maybe. Offensive, sure, if that's their beef. But certainly not on the same level of Weinstein et al.

      The conflation here is nonsensical and really serves no purpose aside from inflaming the tribe.

    6. "Somerby doesn't seem to care about that. His main focus is on making Maddow appear to be a hypocrite by behaving like a sex criminal toward Bentley, while showing his tape (Somerby doesn't mention that it was in the context of describing all of the sex allegations). Louis C.K. committed a crime. Rachel did not. "

      Sex criminal? That's really an apt description?

      Bob's right. The Crazy is Here.

    7. Are the people on this site the last to realize "family values", like "small town values" only means "white"?

    8. @10:51 C.K. & Weinstein did the same thing. The problem is that the women can't say no without jeopardizing their careers. Now he is being fired for it. He deserves it.

      If you think this isn't a crime, put on a raincoat and try it on the nearest woman. You will be charged with indecent exposure and public indecency, as long as you keep your hands to yourself. If not, it is assault. These were not dates. It was in a work environment and the women were mostly female comics trying to earn a living.

    9. I was referring to the first sentence Maddow reference.

      The CK allegations involve hotel rooms and other non-public spaces. If he asked for and obtained permission, and from people he knew, there is no "crime."

      Why all the exaggeration? What need is being served here with the "tribe"? And exactly when did going after teenagers become "pedophilia" and "child molestation"?

      I've been seeing this all day from the Boehlert/Digby crowd, and it's disappointing. It makes those two terrifically unreliable.

    10. Always the mark of a reasoned response to an argument, Tag.

      I could really care less what I think of CK as well. But I did read the original argument enough to get the stories down straight.

    11. No one cares about what you read or want you derived or anything about what you write here today, yesterday or ever.

  5. “Geographers.” I didn’t like the term at first, but it makes actual sense in view of where our planet is going.

    I think if geographers wish to parse past media malfeasance in terms of their effect on said phenomenon (doom), that we should hope that Bob’s record is found, crabbed as it is.


  6. Drag a 100 dollar bill through a trailer park and you never know what you'll come up with.

  7. Moore says he remembers dating a couple of the 16 year olds (with their mothers permission). That lends credence to the rest of the story, especially given the external corroboration by people who were told about it in real time. One of the women is a Trump voter, but that’s all part if the Democrat plot Moore says. Unfit to hold office!

  8. Typed in a long note which the comments system ate, as far as I can tell.

    Short version:

    1) if the Fox Propaganda Network can call it "pedophilia" - and they are doing so - that's good enough for me. Daniel Dale called AL GOP chairs, and most (all?) of them said "yeah, so what? what's all the fuss?" If they don't have a problem with Corfman's account - and they don't - why should liberals?

    2) a former colleague says Moore (in his 30s) dated high school kids:

    3) an escapee from a patriarchal Christian family writes that 25-and-up men marrying very young girls is a Thing:

    and says that, like the AL GOP chairs, she finds Corfman's account credible. Guessing she knows more about the culture than most.

    4) The Very Big Deal for the GOP is that they're having a dustup over whether or not pedophilia is OK. Again, Fox says so (check out C&L), leading Dave Zirin to coin a koan: "Democrats are divided over single payer healthcare. Republicans are divided over pedophilia." A lot of people are having an "Oh, yuk!" reaction.

    5) For these reasons national Goopers and some AL Goopers (including Gov. Ivey) are trying to lever Moore off the ballot.

    Goopers are making way more noise about this than Dems, so I don't get the caterwauling over liberal Crazy here.

    1. > Anon: "Typed in a long note which the comments system ate, as far as I can tell."

      I had that experience many times. Not so much since installing a browser add-on to save my comment fields in just such cases.

      If using Firefox, try: Form History Control, or Lazarus.

  9. How blessed I feel now after suffering from the hands of my husband and his family. I was diagnosed with breast cancer for good 2 months and my husband and I have been married for 15 years . My husband lost the love and affection he had for me and decided to get another woman in his life. I was so devastated and restless for I was loosing my husband to another woman. I tried what I knew best to convince him not to take another woman that I will be fine but his family was so much persuading him to get a new wife. I nearly committed suicide for I felt so useless to everyone around me. At my place of work, my co-worker linked me up to a Doctor called CASERA that he can help me get my husband back and get me cured from the breast cancer for his works is effective and permanent. I contacted him via Email: [ ] and confided in him and he told me that my case is different that as far I have made in contact with him, that my life will be a new dawn filled with smiles, joy and happiness. My husband came back pleading with me that he was so sorry for it was never his intention to leave me for another woman but that of his family for he was the only son of the family. I accepted him back and I told him that I no longer have breast cancer that i have been cured from it and today, we are so happy and I will never forget Doctor CASERA for helping me. All this took place just within 48 hours after I contacted him and the result showed up as he said it. This is his contact for anyone out there that needs his help also. E-mail: [ ] OR Call/text: +1 (518) 460-6400. He can also cure diseases like HIV, AIDS, Herpes Virus, Cancer, E.T.C.