GAPS AND INDIFFERENCE: It's all about The Sex and The Chase!

FRIDAY, MAY 4, 2018

And the criminal indifference:
Today, we interrupt the real world to bring you news of your "press corps."

Also, we continue our anthropological studies. Putting Aristotle's dreams to the side, what sort of creature is Homo sapiens?

What are we humans actually like? The news there isn't good.

At this site, we've been speaking all week about some of the people we have to waste. At the same time, our "press corps" has lost itself in dreams about sex with Stormy. It's as we told you long ago:

Once you give them permission to talk about sex, they'll end up discussing nothing else.

"Man [sic] is the rational animal?" Aristotle, please! In the end, we humans are the animal that wants to live in other people's underwear drawers. We want to chase people around about sex. In the end, we want nothing else.

Your lizard is saying this can't be true. You lizard is claiming that the press corps' work this week has been highly principled and extremely important.

Silly children and peeping toms, please! To place our critique on the highest level, consider this presentation by Kevin Drum, the country's least crazy journalist:
DRUM (5/3/18): Today is beyond nuts. The president’s lawyer has admitted that the president paid off a porn star to keep her quiet during the campaign and has been lying about it ever since. He also admitted that the president fired the FBI director because he had refused to publicly state that the president wasn’t under investigation. He also thinks that pretty much everyone in the Justice Department should be fired in order to bring the current investigation of the president to a halt. And they should probably all be investigated themselves. Oh, and we also learned that the president’s bagman/fixer has been under a wiretap for at least the past several weeks, which might explain some of the panic emanating from the White House. [UPDATE: It was a pen register, not a wiretap. In other words, just a record of incoming and outgoing calls, not recordings of conversations.]
Drum is the least crazy journalist/blogger around. Ignore the error he made in his excitement and haste. That highlighted passage from his own post takes us close to the border of the realm he has called "beyond nuts."

Why do we say that? Here's why:

Duh! Of course the politician in question paid the porn star to shut up. Beyond that, of course the politician in question has chosen not to reveal this fact.

Consider some recent history:

In the 1990s, the shoe was on the other foot. The press corps was chasing Bill Clinton around about ten acts of oral sex with a 24-year-old federal employee who they insisted on describing as a 21-year-old intern.

It wasn't just that he had engaged in oral sex—he'd also been lying about it! (Or at least conveying a false impression.)

Back then, the press corps was living in Clinton's underwear drawer. Today, they've crawled into Trump's, and that has made all the difference:

Back then, many liberals were able to offer an obvious observation. Of course people don't rush out to reveal their extramarital affairs. This may be the world's most obvious fact. Who doesn't understand this?

Back then, it was Clinton who had engaged in extramarital sex. In this case, it's Donald J. Trump who has allegedly done so.

Back then, many liberals were able to note the obvious fact that people don't rush out to reveal such behavior. Today, our entire journalistic enterprise is built around a state of shock at the news that Donald J. Trump may have done the same thing.

We say "allegedly" in the current case for an obvious reason. Here it is:

No one knows if Donald J. Trump had sex on one occasion, in 2006, with Stephanie Clifford.

Stephanie Clifford says he did; Donald J. Trump says he didn't. Since these are two of the slimiest, least reliable people in the known world, we don't know why anyone feels certain about whose account is accurate.

Did Donald J. Trump f*ck Stephanie Clifford on one occasion twelve years ago? Astoundingly, this is the only topic being discussed in "cable news" at this point.

Anyone with an ounce of sense can see that this just doesn't matter. But Lawrence and Brian and Chris and Anderson, accompanied by a cast of thousands, are now discussing virtually nothing else.

It's all they actually want to discuss; for that reason, they invent excuses for doing so. One such excuse involves the great dream—the dream that Donald J. Trump will be taken down by a "campaign finance" offense.

This dream is so stupid it squeaks. Occasionally, a legal expert notes this point. Everyone else just ignores it. (In the end, it's also a prescription for civil wat.)

The dream exists 1) because our journalists want to discuss The Sex, and 2) because the liberal world can't succeed at politics and therefore has to dream about getting The Others locked up. This is the point to which we've descended in our pursuit of The Sex.

Did Donald J. Trump have sex with Clifford on that one occasion? We have no way of knowing. We do know what Clifford, our "feminist hero," has done over several summers:

In 2006, she went to Trump's hotel room where she says they had sex. She knew he had a new-born child, but so what? She f*cked him anyway. In The Dumbest Story Ever Told, she has said she felt she had to f*ck the guy as a type of courtesy deal.

Rather plainly, Clifford did whatever she did that night in the hope of gaining career advancement through Trump's TV show, The Apprentice. By 2011, Clifford has said, that possibility had died. As a result, she did what any slimeball would do:

She began trying to sell her seamy story for cash.

Clifford says she abandoned that attempt after she was threatened. It's possible that she actually was. Obviously, it's also possible that she's just making this up, helped along by the world's most plainly reptilian lawyer.

(We don't believe in Beelzebub. If we did, we'd feel pretty sure that Beelzebub had to be him, although we might be slightly puzzled by the lack of attempts at disguise.)

At any rate, Clifford wasn't so scared by this alleged threat that she didn't start trying to sell her slimy story again in 2016. Trump was now running for president. Presumably, this suggested to Clifford that the cash value her dirt had probably gone up.

She tried to sell her story to Jacob Weisberg at Slate, but Homey don't play it that way. As a result, she sold her story to Michael Cohen for $130,000. Could it possibly be any more obvious that Clifford's a hustler/slimeball?

Because we liberals are hopeless and sad, we've been willing to buy the silly claim that Clifford "just wanted to tell her story," and that she has therefore been "silenced."

Duh. She always could have told her story. Here's the problem—she didn't want to tell her story; she wanted to sell her story. Finally, she did just that, for 130 large.

Also this:

Because we liberals are hopeless and sad, we've accepted another story. We've accepted Clifford's ridiculous story about why she had sex with Donald J. Trump in the first place.

Telling the truth would have been unseemly, so she told her stupid story to Anderson Cooper, one of the guild's most talented stooges. (He was a stooge for Donald J. Trump during the last campaign.) The story she told was absurd on its face. But desperate for ardent tribal glory, we swallowed every drop.

Did Trump have sex with Stephanie Clifford on one occasion twelve years ago? No sane person could actually think that this actually matters.

Meanwhile, in our tribal dumbness, we're unable to feel anger at Clifford for the worst thing she's done—for the way, Putin-like, she tried to interfere with our last election.

Gennifer Flowers did the same thing in 1992, peddling a bunch of exciting claims which were almost surely false. Sixteen years later, along came Clifford. In her search for that pile of cash, she tried to do the same thing.

Sensible people should be glad that she was "silenced" before the election. (She always could have told her story, but she wanted cash.) Indeed, sensible people should join us in proposing creation of a federal fund to silence all such hustlers during election years.

Instead, we liberals, silly and sad, are acting like Clifford and her reptilian lawyers are heroes of our "resistance."

One final ridiculous question:

Our journalists love to ask it! If Donald didn't f*ck Stephanie Clifford, then why did she get all that cash?

Duh. When people come forward with thrilling sex claims during an election campaign, it doesn't matter if the claims are true or false. The claims will get bruited all around either way.

Quoting Twain, sex claims go halfway around the world before sanity can get its pants back on. We don't know if Clifford's claim is true, but the truth doesn't hugely matter at a time like that.

Back in 1992, Flowers was making thrilling claims which were almost surely false. That didn't make any difference. Clowns began to bruit them around in ways which could have changed world history. Luckily, we had much less "cable news" at that time, and virtually no Internet.

(We did have Howard Stern and his idiot sidekicks. They pimped and partied and played.)

Here at this site, we're glad that Cohen paid Stephanie Clifford to please just shut the f*ck up! She's now crawling around with her lawyer trying to score an even larger bag of cash. Because our "journalists" are now allowed to talk about Sex, they are discussing nothing else, just as we told you they would.

Aristotle said they were "rational animals," but Aristotle was wrong. In the end, they want to live in the underwear drawer, and that's the only thing they want. Even Drum was briefly caught in the undertow when he made the highlighted statements. And he's our sanest journalist!

All week long, and last week too, we've been talking about millions of American kids who get a bad break growing up. Those children don't count within our mainstream or liberal news orgs, and they never have.

They stand at the wrong end of some very large gaps. Lawrence and Brian and Rachel and Chris are getting wealthy on cable TV—and they're criminally indifferent to those children's plight.

In the process, we get mightily entertained and told we've formed a resistance.

"Buffalo Bill's defunct," Cummings said. Anthropologically speaking, so is Homo sapiens. Just turn on your TV machine any weekday night!

For extra credit only: From watching the excited chatter on cable news, did you understand what Drum said? Did you know that "it was a pen register, not a wiretap?"

People, we're just asking! But it's all about the excitement now. It's excitement all the way down.


  1. "Kevin Drum, the country's least crazy journalist"

    'Journalist'? Puh-leeze, Bob. Gary Webb was a journalist. Max Blumenthal is a journalist.

    Kevin Drum is a repulsive liberal hack.

    1. Gary Webb was a Right-wing elites had him killed.

  2. Several of my relatives favor the following simple reasoning: Clinton had a sex scandal and was impeached. So Trump should be impeached for his sex scandal.

    They ignore key differences, two of which Bob points out

    1. Clinton's happened during his Presidency.
    2. Perjury
    3. Definite evidence of Clinton's misbehavior

    1. So Clinton was impeached for sexual behavior, and each and very Conservative who paraded through the 90s repeating "rule of law" were just bullshitters who would turn around in the next decade to excuse a torture regime, and whine about "criminalizing success" when banker fraud crashed the worlds economy?

      Other than pointing out Conservatives have always been full of shit, and we'd all be better off ignoring their noise, I'm not sure I grasp what else you're trying to sell here.

    2. No matter how many times you repeat your bullshit, Comrade DinC, there was no perjury.

      Here's another difference. President Clinton was forced to undergo a deposition in a phony manufactured bullshit Paula Jones case. President chickenshit coward tRump will plead the 5th and you will cheer. That's the fucking difference, you lying sack of shit.

    3. Tell me something David, when president pussygrabber committed FRAUD on the American people by falsely issuing a letter from his presumed doctor which he himself dictated, would you consider that as bad or worse than lying about a blowjob in a phony civil suit instigated by shadowy right wing billionaires? How bout when president Traitor lies to the American people on the average of 20 times a day? Oh, that's right, that doesn't bother you, you actually are impressed by his willingness to lie to get his way. As you've explained, you think that makes him smart.

    4. AnonymousMay 4, 2018 at 11:07 AM -- Clinton was NOT impeached for sexual behavior, He was impeached for committing perjury while discussing sexual behavior.

    5. mm - you know the answers to your rhetorical question. Perjury is a felony punishable by several years in prison. Simply lying is not a crime.

      I tend to agree that it was unfortunate that President Clinton was forced to undergo a deposition. Ironically, that situation was due to laws and procedures promoted by liberals.

    6. David, why do you continue to LIE? There was no perjury.

    7. mm -- wikipedia says
      impeachment of Bill Clinton was initiated in December 1998 by the House of Representatives and led to a trial in the Senate for the impeachment of Bill Clinton, the 42nd President of the United States, on two charges, one of perjury and one of obstruction of justice.

    8. Yes, we've been over this many times before David.

      You neglect to mention that this was a fraudulent civil case and the judge ruled that question concerning Monica to be immaterial. In order to be perjury the lie has concerning a material matter.

      In fact, the judge in the Paula Jones suit ruled the Monica Lewinsky business immaterial, and ultimately ruled the Jones suit itself invalid. Prosecution for perjury in these circumstances, Clinton supporters say, would be ludicrous.

      Just because your party's cretins decided to drag this country to its knees and included that in the bill of impeachment doesn't make it as a matter of law true.

      I know you don't give a shit about the truth, so I am really wasting my time.

      And by the way, that wasn't a rhetorical question, that was an honest question. YOu actually consider a lie about a blowjob in a fraudulent politically motivated civil suit to be worse than the president falsifying a doctor's report and then fraudulently presenting it to the country. That's all I need to know.

    9. “I know you don't give a shit about the truth, so I am really wasting my time.”

      True and true.

    10. DavidinCal,
      Voted Trump for the bigotry. Stayed for the treason.

  3. e e cummings sometimes wrote his name
    with lower-case initials
    Sometimes with Upper Case
    but either way, his poems

    who gives a Shit?

    But David, back to immigration law. Keeping Central Americans out now is good, but keeping Eastern European Jews out after 1924 was bad. Right? And accepting Jewish immigrants in the 1970s and 80s was super-cool.

    1. Caesar -- I am not opposed to Central American immigrants. I am opposed to ILLEGAL immigration by any group.

    2. Trump is opposed to Central American immigrants. Are you really unaware that he and the Republicans have been reducing the number of people admitted legally?

    3. Anon - 8:06 - Trump is opposed to family-based migration. He has not taken any position opposing Central American legal immigration.

    4. Yes, they have reduced the quotas for people from Central America.

    5. 9:28,
      But David doesn't believe it, so it's not true.
      Checkmate, libtard!

    6. David, Trump revoked TPS status for 57,000 Hondurans today, with the intent of deterring more Hondurans from seeking asylum in the USA.

    7. AnonymousMay 4, 2018 at 10:13 PM - Trump also revoked TPS status for 9,000 Nepalese. BTW how do you know what Trump's intent was?

    8. Trump is the best thing to happen to Conservatives. The time and energy they save not having to make believe they have a problem with treason, is immeasurable.

    9. "BTW how do you know what Trump's intent was?"

      If his lies don't matter, why should his truths?

  4. LORD.

    First Bob convincingly berates a book that, after all, he shouldn't complete before even talking about. Then he commits and embarrasing error equal to anything Chozick is likely to match in the remainder of her tome.
    Duh. the problem, BOB, you incredible nincompoop, was that Trump ADMITTED DANIELS WAS HANDLING COHEN FOR HIM, something she had previously denied. I know this subject makes Bob a little crazy, and Avenatti's seemingly effective on air pursuit of Trump has ruduced Bob to frazzled name calling, but this isn't just gross incametence on Bob's part. Glad he's big on attorney client privilege, which by the way, does not always protect illegal activity.

  5. Big Brother does not watch us, by his choice. We watch him, by ours. There is no need for wardens or gates or Ministries of Truth. When a population becomes distracted by trivia, when cultural life is redefined as a perpetual round of entertainments, when serious public conversation becomes a form of baby-talk, when, in short, a people become an audience and their public business a vaudeville act, then a nation finds itself at risk; a culture-death is a clear possibility.

    — Professor Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death: Discourse in the Age of Show Business (1985)

    1. Yeah. There's also Guy Debord.

    2. enfin, les situationnistes sont mentionnés sur The Howler Daily. J'espère que tout le monde peut lire et comprendre Guy Debord lorsqu'il a prédit les déconnexions qui sont couramment décrites ici.

      tout est détérioré en France à. Eh bien, pas le fromage.

    3. At least Postman takes a holistic view of the problem, unlike Somerby, who only wants to blame "liberals."

    4. Many of the Liberals here don't even realize or understand the problem. They truly think Maddow is good (she almost literally turns serious public conversation into baby talk ... or teenager talk really is her thing.) Others here think cable news is good! They truly think Daniel's is a hero. They are just not informed. They've watched so much TV and commercials that they Don't even know who they are anymore. They don't know their own agency. They don't understand that every moment they spend watching cable TV is a moment of their life that they are giving up and surrendering to "Big Brother". It's too deep and complex for them to understand. They are too far gone. I think it's great that Bob is describing the problem to them. But it's too deep and complex for them to understand. They can start by trying to understand Debord.

    5. Watching cable news is ceasing to live. It is giving your life over to others. If you watch cable news, you are being used, swindled, as the author here describes.

    6. That's why conservatives should stop watching Fox.

    7. I don't own a lizard. Can I still participate in discussion here?

    8. "They truly think Maddow is good (she almost literally turns serious public conversation into baby talk..."

      She better cash in by running for President in the GOP primaries, before the next half-wit steals her spotlight.

  6. Anyone else remember the days when porn was considered by progressives to be demeaning to women? If not trafficking in violent or oppressive imagery?

    Now this porn merchant "Stormy Daniels" is a hero.

    THAT'S what's crazy, Kevin. Bob knows.

    1. Times change. A politician committing adultery by fucking a porn star and lying about it used to be considered disqualifying by Christian conservatives.

    2. Further proof of her sleaze and greed: this is via Slate describing the lawyer she used to to get the hundred and thirty thousand:

      >have a look at William Bastone’s deep dive in the Smoking Gun. “Davidson specializes in extracting payments in exchange for the quashing of incriminating videos and/or details about sexual indiscretions, STDs, and all manner of regrettable behavior,” Bastone writes. Like Saul Goodman, Davidson understands that you can make an outstanding living by getting people to pay you to go away—even though paying ensures you’ll be back later.

      It's really pathetic how far we've come to put this bottom-of-the-barrel con woman up as some sort of free speech hero.

    3. It is irrelevant whether Stormy Daniels (Stephanie Clifford) works as a porn actress or not. Her affair with Donald Trump was not part of her professional work. If she were a waitress or a file clerk, the situation would be the same, except she probably wouldn't have been seeking a role on Celebrity Apprentice and wouldn't have entered Trump's world. Although Trump has assaulted women in similarly innocuous occupations before, based on the accusations against him.

      That's why those who assume she is running a con or lying because she is a porn actress are way off base. There is no natural connection between acting in porn and lying or being ambitious or seeking money (something all humans with jobs are doing to support themselves).

      Trump is the one who paid her off. He purportedly approached her with the payoff offer, which effectively prevented her from making much more money by selling her story to tabloids. If she were greedy, she wouldn't have signed the NDA and accepted the payoff. She would have held out for what the tabloids typically pay.

      But you guys are saying this to slime her, not because you are in touch with any kind of reality about this situation.

    4. Davidson colludes with Trump and Cohen. He also represented the Playboy model Trump was trying to silence.

    5. No one could have predicted capitalists giving women shit for making money.

    6. "A politician committing adultery by fucking a porn star and lying about it used to be considered disqualifying by Christian conservatives."

      Are you the last person to realize the overwhelming trait of Christian Conservatives is bigotry?

      We need to replace "In God We Trust" with "Slow on the Uptake."

  7. "What are we humans actually like? The news there isn't good."

    Somerby keeps referring to Anthropology whenever he wants to chastise people for being human. All of the anthropologists I know from my grad program because anthropologists because they like people, not because they think humans are despicable.

    Somerby has spent too much time in Catholic confession. His view of humanity is so jaundiced he resembles a priest from the fire and brimstone scare people about hell days, more than anything.

    I don't know how he gets up in the morning.

  8. “Anyone with an ounce of sense can see that this just doesn't matter.”-BS

    Then Bob proceeds to waste hundreds of words wasting his and his readers’ time on ad hominem attacks on a woman that would have been one of his beautiful children, if this were a NAEP post comparing low income student scores from 20 years ago in impoverished areas.

    Gregory said she "came from an average, lower-income household… there [were] days without electricity",[14] and has described herself as coming from a "really bad neighborhood."[13]

    Really nice for a trust fund kid that went to Harvard to attempt to demean and dehumanize a fellow American for perhaps not making choices BS would have, when BS didn’t face the obstacles Ms. Clifford faced at an early age. Really nice to see that the DH is more interested in punching down, while making tenuous points, and false equivalencies when the stakes are supposedly so high.

    Were you like this in the 1970s when Woodward and Bernstein were getting so much wrong about the Watergate story, a 3rd rate burglary? You seem convinced that the only way to get the public to understand how dangerous Trump is by some erudite flawless perfection. Your lack of success on the comedy circuit does not install confidence that you have a very solid foundation of what the public actually wants.

    You dislike mind reading, but so much of your writing boils down to you ascribing nefarious motives to people you don’t like with little, if any evidence to support your allegations.

    You love to quote MLK, but you seem to love the status quo much more.

    -C’est Moi

  9. Hello Every One Out Here

    I'm from United States North Bergen(US). I read some testimony about Dr. Iyaryi on how he has helped people in bringing back there ex within 48 hours i was just thinking if that was real,And decided to call a lady who made a testimony and also dropped her number,So i called her and ask her about Dr. Iyaryi she said Dr. Iyaryi is a trustworthy man and he his ready to bring back my lover for me,i was just so happy and a little bit relief that my lover will be back to me soon,Then i decided in contacting Dr. Iyaryi which i did,And before i could share him my problem he has already told me what i came for,And he said everything will be okay within 48 hours that my lover will be back to my arms,So he said he would be casting the spell and that within 48 hours my lover would call me,So i hoped so truly before the 48 hours i got a call from a man who has left me for the past 6 years saying he is sorry and he wants me back,i was happy and i said i also want him back,Then i traveled to Canada to meet him up,And he apologized for what he has done to me now he proposed to marry me and we are both preparing for our wedding soon, All thanks to the great and World best spell caster, Dr. Iyaryi His private mail And also Reach him on WhatsApp Number: +2349057915709 Thanks Dr. IyaryI