THE FALL: Manifestations of the fall!


Manifestations of Babel: Donald J. Trump, the former president, was launching a manifestation.

Last Saturday night, he was speaking at a Save America rally in Robstown, Texas. Before long, he was discussing "the January 6th committee of unselect political thugs:" 

TRUMP (10/22/22):  Remember this, and I’m going to get off this subject, but January 6, January 6, January 6 was caused because of a crooked stolen election. And they don’t even talk about it during the January 6 committee hearings. Never even discussed.

January 6 was caused by a stolen election. But the committee of that name won't even discuss that fact!

And that's not all they won't discuss! As the former president continued, he turned to a favorite tale:

TRUMP (continuing directly): So they don't discuss that. And what's the second thing they don't discuss? Nancy Pelosi is in charge of security in the Capitol. Ronny knows this better than anybody. There he is. And they don't discuss it at all because they said, "Hands off, we're not going to discuss that." 

I authorized from 10 to 20,000 troops, should they need them, four days, three days earlier. Nancy Pelosi didn't like the look and she decided not to do it. They never discussed that.

In the run-up to January 6, Trump authorized twenty thousand troops—but Nancy Pelosi wouldn't allow it! According to Donald J. Trump, the January 6 committee won't even discuss that fact.

The claim about the thousands of troops is a favorite of Trump's. By now, the claim has been stated, and restated, then stated again, about twenty thousand times.

On this morning's Morning Joe, we saw videotape of a recent focus group. Elise Jordan had spoken with ten Trump voters in Pittsburgh. Eventually, one of the voters said this:

TRUMP VOTER: Nancy Pelosi denied his request of several thousand National Guard troops.

Trump voters have heard that claim at least ten thousand times. The claim has launched a thousand negative fact-checks, but there was no sign that any of the focus group members knew anything about that.

The young man who offered that remark almost surely believed what he said. On the videotape, Jordan offered a somewhat clumsy rebuttal to his claim, but then quickly moved on.

Even this morning, when the tape was played on Morning Joe, no one offered a clear rebuttal to what that young man said. The claim had been broadcast once again, with no clear attempt at correction!

History teaches that Cassandra, daughter of King Priam and Queen Hecuba, "was a Trojan priestess dedicated to the god Apollo and fated by him to utter true prophecies but never to be believed."

Cassandra's foreknowledge made her life hard. As if things weren't bad enough, she could only see the future when a snake or snakes licked her ears!

For ourselves, we see them everywhere we look. We see manifestations of the belief that our nation, such as it was, has already come apart, in a way unlikely ever to be undone.

The red tribe spills with false or unfounded belief. Given the failures of our blue tribe, can "the center" hold?

Tomorrow: Some bogus beliefs are merely false. Some bogus beliefs may seem worse.


  1. So, what's your point, dear Bob?

    Are you suggesting that dembots need to bullshit more skillfully? But don't you realize that no one is listening to them anymore?

    ...because, y'know, they've lied a few million times too many in the past 6 years...

    1. The first point of the day, dear
      Klamsman, is that you are a waste
      of space. Same as every day.

    2. Mao, your response, as all so often, states a valid point of view, if only from a Goebbelsian way of putting things.

  2. Bob takes a different tact today. Instead of justifying Trump with the now ever more absurd notion that he might believe the things he says,
    his suggestion is the press has not
    sufficiently set the record straight.
    The press’s performance during
    the Trump era is a big topic, and
    yes, things have fallen apart. The.
    worst crimes of MSNBC never
    get noticed in the Daily Howler, as
    that would throw shade on Bob’s
    premise that the network slavishly
    serves the left. But there are many
    examples. On Mo Dowd, for
    example, I don’t know that Bob
    has ever mention the friendly
    treatment his campaign initially
    received from her. But there are
    lots of examples. But to site one
    example of Trump’s freakish
    behavior and say, “look, the press
    Isn’t paying enough attention….”
    Obviously doesn’t fit much with
    “Trump, Trump, Trump Trump
    Jail” .Bob’s way of saying “Nothing
    to see here folks..•

    1. Trump can both be the media’s eyeball-catching villain of the century and the emblem of their penchant for giving lucrative drama to their niche audience, as opposed to salient info to the general public.

      That’s hardly illogical or inconsistent.

    2. “The media’s eyeball catching villain” Maybe Fox News doesn’t classify as “media” to a right-winger, but pretty clearly there’s been a lot of Trump hagiography going on over there.

    3. Of course there has been, but you aren’t arguing with me. Your argument is with a man who has already taken that side of things as a given.

      He’s asking that this sort of thing be stumped upon as much to the public as eager speculation of Trump and gold jail bars.

    4. The media's shot of the empty podium waiting for Trump's speech, was a real-life metaphor for both the media, and the Republican party.

    5. I look at this as being the same thing on your side, and the podium was empty in a far more significant way.

    6. Cecelia adores Bob Somerby, who opines that Trump is a mentally ill psychopath, and she still proudly supports Trump. Are we supposed to be impressed or embarrassed, or what, that Cecelia and her whole party have thrown themselves behind such a man, and she can still come here and gleefully abet Somerby’s liberal bashing. Or does Cecelia think Somerby is just trolling when he calls Trump insane or calls right wingers victims? Get help, Cecelia.

    7. Cecelia doesn't support Trump because he's mentally ill. She supports Trump, because Trump is a bigot.

    8. I don’t adore Bob Somerby. I don’t know him from Adam. I admire and respect his thoughts.

      The glitch is that you can’t fathom esteem for anyone who doesn’t utterly hold your views.

      I don’t believe that Trump is a psychopath, but he is his worst enemy, and that’s saying a lot considering the malice of his foes and the power they weld.

      Why would I get angry over your or Somerby’s opinion of conservatives? You are Democrats. I get that.

      I don’t hold Democrats in the sort of contempt you hold for your opposition, but you have no power over me than your vote. Which you SHOULD possess.

      I’m not concerned about your opinion of me, or Somerby’s if he had one.

      I’m concerned about the people who do have power and sway. This blogger shares that too and expresses it in a sharply analytical AND intuitive way.

    9. Anonymouse 5:10pm, being a flying monkey is no way to go thru life, but you’re suited for it.

    10. When did he opine that Trump was a mentally ill psychopath?

    11. “I don’t hold Democrats in the sort of contempt you hold for your opposition”

      This statement serves a dual purpose.

      It is, predictably, vague. Who is “you” referring to here? Democrats, or me, as in mh? Because, Cecelia you don’t know me, and you do not know this about me. It is not true for me, nor is it true for all Democrats. (Let’s just say that your party is rather unmatched in its contempt for its “opposition.”)

      It also serves to single yourself out as the one with good intentions, while all of your adversaries here are no damn good. Way to ride that moral high horse. It’s laughable. You have called me all kinds of horrible names because I try to make good faith critiques of Somerby.

      And you did say once that you adored him.

      It’s this holier than thou attitude that makes people wish you would just fuck off sometimes.

    12. Bob Somerby is not Adam.

    13. You’re kidding, right, anon 5:26 ?

      Here, Somerby says: “is it possible that President Trump is, in fact, a "sociopath?" So Dr. Dodes seemed to say when he spoke with Lawrence O'Donnell on February 27.

      Indeed, he even used the term "psychopathic" to describe the president's ongoing behavior!”

      Then, Somerby says “She seemed to say that it's time to discuss that possibility—that it's time to discuss it out loud.

      In a rational world, that suggestion would make perfect sense.”

      Please do not question this again. It is an ongoing theme of Somerby’s that started when Trump was running.

    14. Cecilia, though I'm a democrat, you usually make sense and with humor (though often obscurely)., in contrast to the TDH haters here who are painful to read. you say Trump is "his own worst enemy." I can't help thinking that the ex-Prez goes off the deep end with demagogic distortions of the truth constantly, that it is much more than him being his own worst enemy, he's undermining the whole U.S. democracy. If life wasn't absurd enough. Do you disagree?

    15. mh - those quotes are not an opining that Trump is a mentally ill psychopath. So let me ask again, when did he opine that Trump was a mentally ill psychopath?

    16. Somerby refers to Trump as delusion and possibly a psychopath all the time. He blamed the press for not saying what Bandy Lee did about Trump. He has repeated Mary Trump's diagnosis of him and agreed with it, asking why the press never discusses that either (except it does).

      Put "Trump" and "sociopath" or "psychopath" or "disturbed" or "mentally ill" into the search engine at the top of Somerby's blog and go through and read the many occasions Somerby has discussed this. You may be new here, but it isn't anyone else's job to bring you up to date on Somerby's views.

    17. A suggestion he could be a psychopath is not an opining that he is one. Do you understand the difference?

    18. mh, you’re the one who suggested that I should get help for NOT hating Somerby for his take on Trump.

      That’s nuts.

      He rues my thinking, but he wouldnt hate me or anyone for having voted on Trump. He doesn’t rail and froth at the mouth as Church Lady does as she accuses others of hatred.

      Normal people don’t look at half the country that way and that’s based upon daily encounters with folks all over the place who hold differing opinions.

      You don’t understand that then you need help.

    19. AC/MA, thanks for your very kind words. I’ll try to do better with my writing.

      You are not going to agree with this, but here goes- Trump has never sounded presidential. The closest he ever got to it was right after the attempted congressional baseball team massacre.

      That Trump didn’t…came with the package. That was baked in the cake. Voters who voted for him knew this and appreciated it in a way that would certainly be obscure to you.

      I understand that. I reckon it, rather than condemn it.

      The media didn’t merely report what Trump said, they sensationalized it. They turned the Smokies into Everest with 91% negative analysis.

      No, you’re not going to understand “those other voters” a little better because of anything I might say.

      I do appreciate your desire to do that, but no one will ask you for similar explanations and no one ever will.

    20. Read what Somerby actually says.

    21. We have two kinds of trolls here. 1. Conservatives (paid mostly). 2. Conservatives pretending to be Democrats (paid mostly).

      Also a Lauren Boebert wannabe.

    22. Somerby has repeatedly suggested that the possibility that Trump is a sociopath should be a prominent topic of discussion. That is not opining that Trump is a psychopath.

      It's no wonder you get so frustrated. You compulsively misunderstand what he says. You want him to tow the party line on every issue like all the other blogs you read.


    23. Meh. Dear Bob does tow the party line on every issue.

      It's just that he's concerned about low quality of dembottery.

      He naively believes that higher quality dembottery is possible, and that it might fool some normal people.

      Which is, of course, absurd. No matter how you present wimmin trapped inside men's bodies, or russiagate, or late-term abortion on demand, or any other commandment from the dembot bible, no amount of lipstick will make this pig pretty...

    24. Mao, do you mean Bob pulls the line behind him?

    25. Cecelia’s comments here do not merit response. It certainly has nothing to do with the comments at the top, She’s just babbling.

    26. ...rump has never sounded presidential.

      ...came with the package.

      ....baked in the cake

      Voters who voted for him knew this and appreciated it in a way that would certainly be obscure to you.

      I reckon it, rather than condemn it.

      Did you ever hear such absolute bullshit in your life? We know why you supported Trump, Cecelia.

  3. “Trump voters have heard that claim at least ten thousand times.”

    Those Trump voters have heard this claim from Trump and presenters on Fox News. Is it not up to Fox News to fact-check this, since their voters don’t watch Morning Joe or MSNBC, and apparently, didn’t watch the hearings that Somerby was so dismissive of?

    Here is a Media Matters article showing Chris Hayes of MSNBC debunking Fox News coverage of this lie, where he replays the testimony given to the committee:

    1. It would be nice for the Morning Joe audience to hear the fact check ten thousand times.

    2. And it would be just peachy if Fox News viewers didn’t get to hear the lie pushed ten thousand times by Hannity et al.

    3. A lot of those viewers are Democrats.

    4. Yes, one thing our side has control over, another we don't.

    5. “A lot of those viewers are Democrats.”

      What a pithy thing to say. Whatever it means, it doesn’t justify the pushing of the lie or remove the responsibility for the lie from the liar. Those supposed Democratic Fox News viewers, if they aren’t figments of Cecelia’s head, or a cohort invented in right wing fever swamps, will have heard the lie being debunked over on MSNBC and can read the debunking in mainstream publications. Why, it was even debunked by Jordan, right there on Morning Joe.

      One pictures the absurdity of a lie told once, then debunked, then told again, debunking notwithstanding. If the lie is told a million times, does it require a million debunkings? Well, let’s just troll the fact-checkers and tell it a million and one times.

      This is the shamelessness of shameless liars.

    6. Actually, mh, I don’t think Somerby wants a million debunkings of that matter anymore than we need more salivating media panels speculating on Trump and jail.

      TDH said this: “Even this morning, when the tape was played on Morning Joe, no one offered a clear rebuttal to what that young man said. The claim had been broadcast once again, with no clear attempt at correction!”

      Of, course it’s your shameless job to conflate that request into something absurd.


    8. Cecelia, it has been debunked on MSNBC. I linked to an example in another post. I was referring to anon 3:36, who said it would be nice if Morning Joe viewers could hear the debunking ten thousand times, and to you who made some vague comment. Quit being such a fucking troll.

    9. It was also debunked in testimony to the Jan 6 committee, which MSNBC aired.

    10. Curiously the Dems-watch-Tucker notion was singularly reported nearly a year ago, this is because the 1) data is unreliable and 2) it suggests that Dems are watching to mock right wingers and 3) that Dems are not secured in the same echo chamber bunker that right wingers are.

      Right wingers like Cesillyia are inconsistent and come across as hypocrites and nonsensical because they have no ideology, they only have hate and an undying need to dominate, borne from unresolved trauma and the resultant impact on brain structure.

      Right wingers do not care that Trump is mentally deranged, as Somerby likes to drone on about. Right wingers just do not care, they don't care one whit. So the only way out of this Trump nightmare is to motivate Dem voters, and to bring Trump's corruption to justice. How Somerby is so befuddled by such bone simple stuff surely has to do with his own lost soul and broken moral compass.

      (red states have the highest murder rates, but also crazy high rates of White suicide - these poor souls are suffering, the only way to end their suffering is to understand it, understand it's root causes)

      On the voter motivation issue, if you want to see just how hate-filled right wingers are, look at how hard they try to suppress votes - in America of all places!

      These so called "patriots", the right wingers, are crucifying everyone else for their own sins.

    11. mh, if there are hallmarks for being a troll (and there is) one of them is certainly the reductio ad absurdum arguments that hinge on one rebuttal by Chris Hayes on his show, or the nonexistent demand that there invariably be rebuttals to the tune of one million, if necessary.

      That’s the stuff of trolls all over. Look for something less fatuous for your Somerby beef of the day.

    12. Cecelia, you aren't making sense. It isn't mh who is calling for rebuttals. It is Somerby. And yes, it is foolish to demand all those rebuttals, as if real people don't keep track of what is true and what is not.

      So why are you calling mh's beef fatuous? He is saying that this stuff has already been debunked, and he is correct about that. The 1/6 Committee did talk about all that stuff that Trump says it ignored. We all know that. So I don't see what your point is, other than to talk about mh in a disparaging way.

    13. Anonymouse 5:38pm, you forgot to end with “Now isn’t that special. ”

    14. Anonymouse 5:59pm, no, I did and do understand that mh went from saying that one debunking on another show was enough and anyone who thinks otherwise is demanding endless rebuttals.

      It’s silly meaningless “what can I find to denounce the blogger with today”.

    15. Anonymouse 6:21pm, I might believe you meant that if you weren’t so utterly compelled to read me.

    16. That doesn’t excuse you. Fuck off.

    17. Anonymouse 7:25pm, you can’t quit me. That’s excuse enough.

    18. Cecilia - I kind of get it, I think. Politicians are mealy mouthed, it's so much BS (they kind of have to be, given that they are trying to attract votes from conflicting blocs), Trump isn't presidential, kind of in the mold of Jesse Ventura (who Trump studied). Is he a guy exposing the king is wearing no clothes are a clever con artist? Is it some type of bizarre mass hysteria that's got us to this state where its Trump, trump, Trump all the time. I've always found him nauseating, I admit. Is it a matter of taste, or some people have keener judgment? Maybe you can't explain the phenomenon because there is no plausible way for it to be done. I see mass hysteria all over the place, on both sides, it's not a pleasant sight.

    19. Fetterman is like Ventura. Trump is a soft man-baby, like Gerald Ford except much dumber and with bad hair. Trump attracts the focus to himself because he is a narcissist. You don't blame people for paying attention to someone who is constantly seeking it. If you cannot figure out who to support these days, that is your bad judgment. You can't even figure out who the trolls are here.

    20. Ac/ MA,
      Republicans don't vote for Trump because he induces nausea. Republicans vote for Trump because he validates their bigotry.

  4. There is not a single voter whose vote hinges on whether Nancy Pelosi denied troops. The fact of the matter is that January 6 doesn't matter to a single voter at all. Not a single Democrat and not a single Republican. No voter deeply investigates the question of troops because it doesn't matter. Stipulating that no troops were denied, will that change votes if voters think Trump's claim involves deception? Not a single one because a fib like that is not enough to make someone resort to voting for a Democrat.

    1. Why lie about it then?

    2. And not once, but 10,000 times?

    3. Parents are too busy helping their pre-school children write their theses on CRT, to care about voting.

    4. 5:35 comment of the year!

    5. I'm a January 6 single-issue voter myself. Democrats have wasted too much time and energy on this non-issue as a distraction from their failures.


    6. "There is not a single voter whose vote hinges on whether Nancy Pelosi denied troops."

      Well, in context of the ongoing show trial, it might be somewhat important that the Commander did indeed recommend and authorize the troops (as confirmed by the acting secretary of defense), and that House Sergeant at Arms (who indeed reports directly to the Speaker) rejected it (as he, reportedly "was concerned about the “optics”").

      How exactly Mr Irving got concerned about the “optics” we'll probably never know for sure, but we do know that he, as well as Capitol Police chief and Senate Sergeant at Arms, conspicuously submitted their resignations on January 7th 2020.

    7. Can no one rid us of these noisome trolls?

  5. “On the videotape, Jordan offered a somewhat clumsy rebuttal to his claim”

    What was her rebuttal, and how clumsy was it, since it wasn’t totally but only somewhat clumsy?

    1. mmmm so sexy when Somerby is coy

    2. mh - who are you voting for?

    3. In America people don’t have to answer such questions. It is considered impolite to ask.

    4. I'll pay you for the information.

  6. "Tomorrow: Some bogus beliefs are merely false. Some bogus beliefs may seem worse."

    I thought Somerby said he was going to discuss Ezra's interview with Rachel? Wha happened?

  7. "Even this morning, when the tape was played on Morning Joe, no one offered a clear rebuttal to what that young man said. The claim had been broadcast once again, with no clear attempt at correction!"

    Somerby seems to think that it is the job of MSNBC to continually rebut each and every lie that Trump tells every day. But if they did that, when would they discuss anything else? These are the same old lies being retold. They have been fact-checked already. Anyone with an ounce of sense knows that these are lies because that is all Trump can tell. He has no knowledge or wisdom or anything interesting to say to anyone so he tells a bunch of lies that everyone on both the left and right already knows are lies. And Somerby expects the left to chase its tail rebutting Trump, while he laughs up his sleeve about the way he can make the press run in circles.

    It is sufficient to know that Trump is a liar. Once someone has been shown to tell lies all the time, there is no longer any need to rebut each and every individual lie every time it is told. That is a waste of everyone's time. The right should be attempting to rebut the claim that Trump is a liar, but they don't bother. And if they don't bother, why should we?

    The right thinks it owns the left every time we issue a rebuttal. Why should we give them the satisfaction? And what kind of friend of the left is Somerby when he urges us to make ourselves look silly by rebutting Trump's lies yet again?

  8. "I authorized from 10 to 20,000 troops, should they need them, four days, three days earlier. Nancy Pelosi didn't like the look and she decided not to do it. They never discussed that."

    This statement is all true, or partially true.

    The troops were authorized and either there was a formal rejection on the declared basis of optics or someone offered the opinion that optics were the reason.

    1. This is a lie. Rebuttal Part 1:

      "CLAIM: Former President Donald Trump signed an order to deploy 20,000 National Guard troops before his supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, but was stopped by the House sergeant at arms, at the behest of Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

      AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. While Trump was involved in discussions in the days prior to Jan. 6 about the National Guard response, he issued no such order before or during the rioting. Speaker Pelosi does not control National Guard troops.

      THE FACTS: New footage released Thursday of House lawmakers on Jan. 6 has sparked a resurgence of false claims and conspiracy theories about the insurrection.

      The videos, recorded by Pelosi’s daughter, showed the congresswoman responding to the attack in real time as she negotiated with governors and defense officials in an effort to get Guard troops to the Capitol. In one clip published by CNN, Pelosi can be heard saying that if Trump showed up she would “punch him out.” Some on social media used the occasion to revive baseless claims that Pelosi had stopped a Trump order for tens of thousands of National Guard troops before the event.

      “Trump signed an order to deploy 20,000 Guardsmen on J6. It was refused by the House sergeant at arms, who reports to Nancy Pelosi,” one user wrote Friday on Gettr. The claim also spread on Instagram and Twitter.

      “Trump signed an order to deploy 20,000 Guardsmen on Jan 6. It was refused by the House Sergeant at Arms, who reports to YOU,” a Twitter user tweeted at Pelosi on Saturday.

      Trump has made similar false claims in the past. As The Associated Press has previously reported, Trump was not involved in decision-making related to the National Guard on Jan. 6, and Pelosi did not stand in their way.

      Trump did say during a 30-second call on Jan. 5 with then Acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller that “they” were going to need 10,000 troops on Jan. 6, according to a statement Miller provided to a House committee in May 2021.

      But Miller added that there was “no elaboration,” and he took the comment to mean “a large force would be required to maintain order the following day.” He noted that domestic law enforcement believed they had sufficient personnel.

      There is no evidence that Trump actually signed any order requesting 10,000 Guard troops, let alone 20,000, for Jan. 6. Reached for comment, a spokesperson for the Department of Defense provided a timeline of the agency’s involvement in preparing for and responding to the attack on the Capitol. The timeline shows no such order, and notes only that on Jan. 3, the president concurred with activating the D.C. National Guard to support law enforcement at the behest of Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser.

      National Guard troops were already activated and deployed to checkpoints around Washington before the violence began. When the rioting started, Bowser requested more Guard help, on behalf of the Capitol Police. That request was made to Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy, who then went to Miller, who approved it.

      The Pentagon said Miller approved the request without speaking with the White House because he had gotten direction from the president days earlier to do whatever he deemed necessary with the Guard.

    2. Rebuttal Part 2 -- continuing the AP fact check

      "Neither Pelosi nor the House sergeant at arms could have stopped an ordered deployment of National Guard troops because Congress doesn’t control the National Guard, legal experts say. Guard troops are generally controlled by governors, though they can be federalized, said William C. Banks, a law professor at Syracuse University.

      The online claims “make no sense at all,” Banks said, adding, “The House sergeant at arms, he or she is not in the chain of command. Nor is Nancy Pelosi.”

      “The speaker was no more in charge of the security of the U.S. Capitol that day than Mitch McConnell,” Drew Hammill, Pelosi’s deputy chief of staff, told the AP in an email.

      The AP has previously reported on false claims that Pelosi blocked the National Guard from coming to the capitol on Jan. 6. As the newly released footage showed, she and McConnell, then Senate majority leader, called for military assistance, including the National Guard, during the attack.

      The House sergeant at arms does sit on the Capitol Police Board, which also includes the Senate sergeant at arms and the architect of the Capitol. That board opted not to request the Guard ahead of the insurrection, but did eventually request assistance after the rioting had already begun. There is no evidence that either Pelosi or McConnell directed the security officials not to call the guard beforehand, and Hammill said after the insurrection that Pelosi was never informed of such a request."

    3. Actually, the Commander did recommend and authorize the troops, and Pelosi's administrator (Sergeant at Arms) did refuse to request them. These are facts.

      Idiotic word-salad "rebuttals" of made up "claims" notwithstanding.

    4. Like anyone will believe a troll over the AP.

    5. Mao, if I may be allowed to translate your words here: 'word salad" - is how you respond to what someone says that you can't refute; "the Commander" [referring to former orange faced POTUS] - your synonym for "der Fuehrer".


    6. "...your synonym for "der Fuehrer"."

      Why, yes it is, we suppose. It doesn't surprise us in the least that you hitlerian liberals prefer this sort of lingo. for the word-salad in question, the very first line of it:
      "CLAIM: Former President Donald Trump signed an order to deploy 20,000..."
      leaves no doubt whatsoever. Because, dear dembot, no one has made such a claim. Because everyone with a brain knows that US presidents (unlike your fuehrers) are not allowed to deploy troops inside the US.

      'nuff said...

  9. "The red tribe spills with false or unfounded belief. Given the failures of our blue tribe, can "the center" hold?"

    It is the blue tribe's responsibility to tell the truth to the best of its ability. It is not the blue tribe's job to follow red candidates around and clean up their messes.

  10. "Max Boot: “Polls suggest that the economy and crime are among the most important issues for voters in the midterms — and that, as a result, Republicans are surging in the home stretch. I think a lot of voters are missing the point. These elections are actually a referendum on whether you favor the continuation of democracy in America — and Ukraine.”

    “Those issues are more closely linked than most people realize, because most of the same MAGA candidates who support Donald Trump’s strongman rule at home are either indifferent or hostile to the fate of democracy abroad.”

    1. Max Boot is a tool for the military industrial complex who has blood all over his hands. He's lying. That's what he does.

    2. No, you are lying — that’s what you do.

    3. ‘“These elections are actually a referendum on whether you favor the continuation of democracy in America — and Ukraine.”’

      America AND the Ukraine, huh?

      Can’t neocons find some new material?

    4. No, bloodlust is their only gear.

    5. Fn Max Boot, the lowest, lying scumbag warmonger of them all tells voters they're wrong to worry about the economy and they should worry about wars we are funding in foreign countries instead. And this stupid idiot believes him.

      That's the Democratic party now? Posting quotes from Max Boot claiming our warmongering abroad is more important to voters than the economy?

      It took 20 years but Democrats have completely turned into Republicans.

    6. Helping Ukraine is not warmongering.

    7. Agree, voters should hear more about about stepping-up anti-trust regulations and enforcement to combat inflation. You can't have runaway inflation in competitive markets.

    8. Helping Ukraine is warmongering and most certainly not more important than the economy and crime for voters.

    9. "Helping Ukraine is not warmongering."

      Eh, may we suggest a better, more precise way to put it? This, for example:
      Liberal-neocon war-mongering is not helping Ukraine.

    10. Democrats are Republicans now.

    11. Democrats are represented by and love to quote Max Boot, Liz Cheney and Rick Wilson, the lowest right wing grifters of them all. It's incredible to see that Democrats are now Republicans - mocking voters who care about the economy and crime and encouraging them to focus more on our war machine. These Democrats who support our war-mongering and who call anyone who doesn't a racist, simply have no values at all.

    12. 7:17,
      Why anyone would listen to those know-nothing Right-wingers is beyond me. These morons, who didn't realize the GOP--their party--was a an amoral dumpster fire of bigots and imbeciles until 2016, are now telling the Democratic Party to follow their know-nothing advice.
      One correction I would make is that Democrats don't call anyone who disagrees with them "racists", which would be wrong. They call Republicans "racists", which I don't understand how anyone could argue with a straight face.

    13. God is a figment of dim-witted imaginations.

  11. I find it odd that Somerby so frequently uses Biblical call outs, such as talking about Babel and the fall. Are these code for Christian Nationalists, some sort of Q-Anon reference? Somerby selected these phrases, so he must have some purpose or intend some meaning, despite their lack of relevance to anything else he says today.

  12. Places where Somerby calls Trump disordered, sociopathic or psychopathic:

    6/29/22: "We assume that people who are fundamentally disordered didn't choose to be fundamentally disordered. We assume, for example, that sociopaths didn't choose to be disordered in that unfortunate way.

    We've always recommended pity for disordered people like Trump. For that reason, we'd be reluctant to mix moral and psychiatric assessments together, as Dodes does in this last statement. " Key phrase "disordered people like Trump", said by Somerby about Trump.

    6/29/2017 -- "Regarding this latest incident, Donald J. Trump is and will always be deeply disordered." Key phrase "deeply disordered" said by Somerby about Trump.

    8/27/2019 -- "What might this disordered president imaginably do next year? Start a war? Hack the vote? Do you feel sure where he'd stop?" Key phrase "disordered president" said by Somerby about Trump, after discussing the diagnostic psychiatric analyses and complaining that the press has ignored them.

    4/8/2020 Under a headline that read Sociopath in Chief, Somerby reproduced the Mayo Clinic checklist of Sociopathic diagnostic criteria, then said:

    "When we watched the president's performance at last Saturday's televised marathon, we came away thinking that we had watched a rolling check-list of those symptoms and signs.

    We thought we'd watched a rolling self-diagnosis. We googled the Mayo Clinic's site once again. Check, check, check, we said.

    ("Recurring problems with the law?" Despite the financial power he has long wielded, our president has routinely been in legal trouble on the civil side. His business life has been an extended series of cons and scams. So it goes with the many diagnosable "sociopaths" who aren't Son of Sam.)

    When he introduced Dr. Dodes, O'Donnell said this: "Some mental health professionals, like our next guest, believe that the president's mental health...will continue to be in decline."

    The president's absurd behavior at yesterday's "briefing" suggested that this prediction may have been correct. For ourselves, we've been telling you since last year that we may not even have a presidential election this fall."

    4/9/2020 -- Again under the headline Sociopath in Chief, Somerby first describes the etiology of socipathy and narcissistic personality disorder, then says:

    "Was he subjected to child abuse? We have no way of knowing. He was sent to military school at the age of 13. This may be a suggestion that something was already wrong.

    We've suggested before that we should pity the child who was Donald Trump while opposing the actions of the man. We think our resistance would be more effective were it paired with a dollop of pity—with a tragic view of the world.

    At the president's nightly gong show, our press corps sits supine before him. As we expect to discuss next week, they're rarely willing to challenge his ludicrous claims and his appalling behaviors." The discussion of causes of a disorder clearly implies that the person being discussed has that disorder, since Somerby is seeking causes of it, not arguing whether he has it or not.

    There are more, if I use a search term such as mental illness instead of sociopathy. Somerby uses such terms interchangeably to refer to Trump. And he has been doing this for a long time, citing Dodes and Bandy Lee as authorities and complaining because the press doesn't label Trump mentally ill. Somerby is not expressing uncertainty or evading giving his opinion -- he is repeatedly asking why the press won't raise the question of Trump's sanity.

    1. The premise is, however, that Trump and his supporters are to be morally excused for their actions by mental instability, and those who don’t join him in excusing Trump are ethically suspect. It’s also now Somerby’s excuse for complete disinterest in Trump’s appalling
      behavior and it’s criminality. Trump’s
      behavior, however unhinged, shows
      a marked pattern of self interest
      which calls into question if this is
      mental instability that can be
      treated sympathetically. You have
      to question if Bob’s excuse making
      is even about Trump, it’s just
      a rationalization for Bob to
      disparaged the people he
      hates, MSNBC, etc.

    2. Self-interest is one of the primary traits of sociopaths.