THE REVOLT: Submission grappling promoter expounds!

FRIDAY, JULY 26, 2024

The tools do this every night: Who in the world is Chael Sonnen? 

Below, we'll start to answer your question, possibly for the second time. First though, riddle us this:

Who the heck was José  Ortega y Gasset? Also, what did he say in his most famous book, The Revolt of the Masses? It's a book whose intriguing title has lately been troubling our dreams.

Did we ever read The Revolt of the Masses? If so, it would likely have been in our sophomore year in college. 

We prospective philosophy majors had all fled the department after taking Phil 3 from a certain 25-year-old professor. We ourselves spent a year in exile in European History & Lit. 

As for Ortega y Gasset, we finally decided to look him up after watching Sonnen last night. The leading authority on his life tells us this:

 José Ortega y Gasset

José Ortega y Gasset (1883 – 1955) was a Spanish philosopher and essayist. He worked during the first half of the 20th century while Spain oscillated between monarchy, republicanism, and dictatorship. His philosophy has been characterized as a "philosophy of life" that "comprised a long-hidden beginning in a pragmatist metaphysics inspired by William James, and with a general method from a realist phenomenology imitating Edmund Husserl, which served both his proto-existentialism (prior to Martin Heidegger's) and his realist historicism, which has been compared to both Wilhelm Dilthey and Benedetto Croce."

Good lord! Apparently, though, one author did say that, though only once, in a book. 

Moving right along, what about that alleged revolt? Here's part of the way the authority thumbnails Ortega's most famous book:

The Revolt of the Masses

The Revolt of the Masses (Spanish: La rebelión de las masas) is a book by José Ortega y Gasset. It was first published as a series of articles in the newspaper El Sol in 1929, and as a book in 1930; the English translation, first published two years later, was authorized by Ortega.

[...]

In this work, Ortega traces the genesis of the "mass-man" and analyzes his constitution, en route to describing the rise to power and action of the masses in society. Ortega is throughout quite critical of both the masses and the mass-men of which they are made up, contrasting "noble life and common life" and excoriating the barbarism and primitivism he sees in the mass-man.

He does not, however, refer to specific social classes, as has been so commonly misunderstood in the English-speaking world. Ortega states that the mass-man could be from any social background, but his specific target is the bourgeois educated man, the señorito satisfecho (satisfied young man, or Mr. Satisfied), the specialist who believes he has it all and extends the command he has of his subject to others, contemptuous of his ignorance in all of them.

You can make of such things what you will. The authority includes this excerpt from Chapter 8 of Ortega's once-famous text:

The Fascist and Syndicalist species were characterized by the first appearance of a type of man who "did not care to give reasons or even to be right," but who was simply resolved to impose his opinions. That was the novelty: the right not to be right, not to be reasonable: "the reason of unreason."

— Chapter 8, "Why the Masses Intervene in Everything and Why They Always Intervene Violently"

You can make of that what you will. Also, you can look up "syndicalism" yourself. 

For the record, Ortega never had the chance to watch American "cable news." He never watched a single program on our flailing nation's "cable news" channels. 

He never got to do that! Had he watched the Fox News Channel last night, he ould have seen the aforementioned Sonnen—the person you see thumbnailed below—presented asc some sort of political analyst.

Below, we'll tell you how it went. Here is Sonnen's thumbnail:

Chael Sonnen

Chael Sonnen (born April 3, 1977) is an American submission grappling promoter, mixed martial arts (MMA) analyst, and retired mixed martial artist. Beginning his MMA career in 1997, Sonnen competed for the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC), where he became a top contender in both the light heavyweight and middleweight divisions and challenged for both the UFC Light Heavyweight and UFC Middleweight Championships. Sonnen has also fought in World Extreme Cagefighting, Pancrase, and most recently for Bellator MMA. Sonnen is often considered one of the best mixed martial artists never to have won a major MMA world championship and one of the sport's greatest trash-talkers.

In 2014, Sonnen began working as a MMA analyst for ESPN and two years later, in July 2016, founded Submission Underground (SUG), his own submission grappling promotion.

We're omitting the passage about the incident in the Las Vegas hotel corridor back in 2021. As best we can tell, the attendant lawsuits continue.

In short, Sonnen is a "submission grappling promoter" and a former mixed martial artist. Last night, in his latest appearance on Fox, he was also cast as a political / social analyst.

To our eye and ear, he came across last night as an extremely speedy, somewhat borderline possible semi-nutcase. 

Needless to say, he appeared on the Gutfeld! program. Last evening, this was the panel of analysts:

Gutfeld! panel: Thursday, July 25, 2024
Chael Sonnen: Submission grappling promoter. 
Tyrus: Former professional wrestling champion. Performs as a comedian.
Kat Timpf: Performs as a comedian.
Jamie Lissow: Performs as a comedian. 
Greg Gutfeld (host): 59 years old. Performs as a comedian. 

So it went! Three comedians, joined by one former professional wrestler and one submission grappling promoter. This collection had been assembled to spend an hour, in primetime, conducting political and cultural analyses on our struggling nation's most-watched "cable news" channel.

"Revolt of the masses," someone once said. Not that there's anything wrong with it! 

In fairness, we also thought of Ortega's book title when we watched the first hour of Fox & Friends this morning. In our view, MSNBC is bad enough, but something resembling that alleged revolt seems to take place on the Fox News Channel during quite a few hours each day.

Last night, Sonnen had been deposited in the chair occupied this past Monday night by a 23-yea-old model and actress who has recently begun to "dabble in political commentary." This is the way the clown car rolls on this particular "cable news" channel, as our nation seems to seek a way to follow behind "sacred Troy."

Last night, Sonnen struck us as someone who may have ingested seven or eight too many Red Bulls before the taping began. You can assess his first presentation simply by clicking here

(For the record, he seems to think the vice president's first name is "Kuh-MALL"—two syllables only.)

In the modern lexicon, what happens on this nightly, primetime "news" show might be described as the revolt of the flyweights—but also, of course, as the recitation of the corporate tools.

The analysts all know what to say, and they all proceed to say it. Everyone recites the views of the corporate entity signing their checks. 

They all know what they're paid to say, and they seem eager to say it. (We can't say that MSNBC totally differs from this.)

You can watch Sonnen by clicking that link. That said, we've been discussing the Monday night Gutfeld! show, and we'll return to that debacle as we finish our report.

More specifically, we'll look at the "conspiracy theories" which were possibly whispered that night as the assortment of jugglers and clowns recited the scripts of their paymaster. Indeed, a person could almost think that it started with Gutfeld himself. 

He had started that evening's program by wondering if Hunter Biden will now start "dating" the first lady. (On Tuesday evening's show, his altered his presentation. His verb of choice was now "f*cking.")

He started with the "dating." After that, the rage-infested fellow explained how to pronounce the Vice President's name.

It isn't KAHMA-ala, he helpfully said. The pronunciation is "IDIOT."

This rage-infested corporate tool is 59 years old! We each went to high school right there in San Mateo—we ourselves at Aragon High, he at Tom Brady's Serra.

We can't imagine how a person so filled with rage can emerge from such a sunny land. But if some such "mass man" does so emerge, the Fox News Channel will find him!

Back to those possibly whispered conspiracy theories. Did the rage-filled host kick-start the fun? At 10:07 p.m., on Monday night, the termagant offered this:

GUTFELD (7/22/24): Now, there could be something else going on here. Is there more to Joe dropping out than we know? Does it have something to do with Butler, Pennsylvania? 

I'm not suggesting the Dems tried to have Trump killed, of course...

But remember. Secret Service Director Cheatle was on Jill Biden's security detail. Jill reportedly pushed for Cheatle to get that top job. 

They're a perfect pair—a DEI hire gets a shot, and a phony doctor can give you first aid. 

But what if, when resources are allotted, favorites are played with experience and manpower? It's pretty clear that the White House didn't take threats to Trump seriously. Could this have been negligence by derangement—a shared antipathy for Trump?

So it went, as he struggled to avoid suggesting that the Dems tried to have Trump killed. He was merely asking—asking if President Biden's withdrawal from the campaign had something to do with what happened in Butler that day.

The termagant never doubled back to explain what he meant by that question. In fairness, he instantly said he wasn't suggesting that the Dems tried to have Trump killed—though that, of course, is a time-honored way to float the thought that maybe they possibly did.

So the termagant said, early on, after talking about Hunter "dating" Jill, and after helping us know how to pronounce the VP's name. The guy can keep it up all night, and he typically does.

That said, other members of Monday's panel may have seemed to be floating other theories of the conspiracy kind. It started in an innocuous way, possibly picked up steam:

Dr. Drew Pinsky, 65, grew up with every discernible advantage. He chooses to appear on Gutfeld! all the same.  

By 10:13, he was flatly misstating the contents of the 25th amendment. He then built upon his misstatement, telling us what "you can imagine": about the reason why President Biden stepped aside. 

For the record, "you can imagine" lots of things. On this occasion, Dr. Pinsky did.

"Where do they find people like this?" one of the analysts asked. We don't know, but by 10:17, this same Dr. Drew was lodging a complaint about the Biden administration.

"They're causing conspiracy theories to break out," the privileged potentate comically said. 

As we noted yesterday. the 23-year-ol model who is now dabbling took her turn at 10:33 p.m. "I've been called a conspiracy theorist all day," she said. 

From there, she proceeded to show several million viewers why such things had been said.

That said, it was the former professional wrestler who took the cake this night. At 10:35 p.m., the giant blob of protoplasm started by offering this:

TYRUS: Again, this is the DIE. The biggest questions that should be there is the coincidences that are just too ridiculous to ignore. 

He proceeded to list the coincidences that are just too ridiculous to ignore. In doing so, he seemed to create a speculation about the complicity of "Dr. President Jill" in the recent assassination attempt directed at Donald J. Trump.

It was all amazingly clear to Tyrus. None of the other analysts spoke up—and then at 10:39 p.m., the former professional wrestler and current savant was suddenly back for more:

TYRUS: We still don't know who ordered Afghanistan. It's the same person (pretends to cough)—Dr. President Jill. It's like the same person!

No one else spoke up. On this show, the first lady ordered Afghanistan back in 2021. By the next evening's Gutfeld! program, the termagant/host was saying he hopes she isn't "f*cking" her son.

So goes the nightly revolt, as directed by the aging señorito satisfecho. As this nightly revolt unspools, Blue America's finer thought leaders politely avert their gaze.

We'll close by citing a few other books:

More than a decade ago, we began to quote a prophetic statement by the classicist Norman O. Brown. Brown was very hot in the 1960s, on the basis of two books which we actually did read, or at least attempted to read:

Major books by Norman O. Brown 
Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History (1959)
Love's Body (1966)

Brown is rarely mentioned today. Back then, he was very hot. Upon his death in 2002, the New York Times published this lengthy obituary, testifying to his earlier influence.

More than a decade ago, something Brown once said began to trouble our dreams. We thought it must have come from one of his books, but as this memoir attests, it actually came from a Phi Beta Kappa Address he delivered at Columbia in 1960.

We don't know how we knew about that obscure address. That said, as best we can tell, the murky statement in question went like this:

BROWN (5/31/60): I sometimes think I see that societies originate in the discovery of some secret, some mystery; and end in exhaustion when there is no longer any secret, when the mystery has been divulged, that is to say profaned... 
And so there comes a time—I believe we are in such a time—when civilization has to be renewed by the discovery of some new mysteries, by the undemocratic but sovereign power of the imagination, by the undemocratic power which makes poets the unacknowledged legislators of all mankind, the power which makes all things new.

For the record, we have no clear idea what that actually means. That said, Brown seemed to suggest, even then, that our society was "ending in exhaustion." 

He said our civilization needed to be renewed by the discovery of a new mystery, "by the undemocratic power which makes poets the unacknowledged legislators of all [hu]mankind."

Brown sought the aid of the poets. We've thought this week of Carl Sandburg, the poet and the biographer. 

We've thought about the passage in Abraham Lincoln: The Prairie Years in which the president-elect journeys back to Coles County, Illinois to say goodbye to his step-mother—to Sally Bush Lincoln, the person who had been able to see, when Lincoln was young, that her stepson was very different.

In his famous biography of Lincoln, the poet described their last meeting:

SANDBURG: The next day Lincoln drove eight miles out to the old farm along the road over which he had hauled wood with an ox team. He came to the old log house he had cut logs for and helped smooth the chinks; from its little square windows he had seen late winter and early birds.

Sally Bush and he put their arms around each other and listened to each other’s heartbeats. They held hands and talked; they talked without holding hands. Each looked into eyes thrust back in deep sockets. She was all of a mother to him.

He was her boy more than any born to her. He gave her a photograph of her boy, a hungry picture of him standing and wanting, wanting. He stroked her face a last time, kissed good-by, and went away.

She knew his heart would go roaming back often, that even when he rode in an open carriage in New York or Washington with soldiers, flags or cheering thousands along the streets, he might just as like be thinking of her in the old log farmhouse out in Coles County, Illinois.

The sunshine of the prairie summer and fall months would come sifting down with healing and strength; between harvest and corn-plowing there would be rains beating and blizzards howling; and then there would be silence after snowstorms with white drifts piled against the fences, barns, and trees.

So spoke the poet biographer; so ended this brilliant chapter. In Sandburg's portrait, the sunshine of the prairie summer—and with it, the world of the "common man"—would be there in Lincoln's heart, even when he was being cheered by thousands in giant East Coast parades.

Ortega's "mass man" isn't the American average person. Over here in Blue America, we badly need a poet who can help us regain our connection to the world of people who didn't go to Harvard or Yale or Brown. 

We need to renew our civilization! Or are we the only people who are able to watch cable TV each night?

Over at the Fox News Channel, they assembly a gang of flyweights and clowns to go on the air each night. Each night, the jugglers and clowns proceed say the things they're paid to say. 

Our own thought leaders, in their greatness, choose to avert their gaze. We Blues continue to talk to ourselves, as we've been doing for years.

Sonnen? He's a submission grappling promoter but also, just perhaps, a bit of valuable tool. In the course of his daily life, he may be the world's nicest person.

That said, is the first lady f*cking her son? Did she order Afghanistan? Was she imaginably involved somehow in the assassination attempt?

Has the first lady been f*cking her son? Inquiring minds are encouraged to wonder. Timpf, who plays the thoughtful cast member, sits on her ascot and stares.


60 comments:

  1. The dejectedness among Somerby's fanboys and trolls, and Somerby himself, is palpable since Kamala became the presumptive nominee.

    Yet still they angrily exclaim "look at what you made me do", as they greedily blame the victim in their never ending search to soothe their emotional discomfort.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow. As a fanboy who says Somerby was prophetically right about Biden’s inability to wage a presidential campaign, I’m thrilled that Kamala is going to kick some Trumpuan butt.

      Delete
    2. As a lifelong Republican that voted twice for Trump, I can report that my friends are feeling low right now, but I am steadfast in my evolving distrust of Trump.

      I have always been more of an Eisenhower Republican than a Reagan one, but with how disturbing the Supreme Court has become, I can no longer cling to partisanship.

      Biden has impressed me with his steady hand, and I was set to switch my vote to Biden. Kamala is probably still better than Trump, but I was more motivated to vote for Biden, and with him dropping out I probably will stay home and not vote.

      Delete
    3. But PP, Bret Stephens doesn’t like her. Somerby cared enough to tell us that recently.

      Delete
    4. PP, you are dumbly conflating right wing criticism with prophecy. Somerby was doing harm to the blue tribe via trashing Biden, he did not have a clue that Biden and Harris were going to handle the circumstance so masterfully.

      It is obvious Somerby is now flailing around to find the right narrative to continue his empty goal, caught flat-footed by the political skills of the Dems, whom Somerby daily says are full of themselves, but who in reality are busy about the business of improving society while Somerby cynically snickers and jeers from the sidelines.

      Delete
    5. 1:21 - Even when you’re proven emphatically wrong, you think you’re right. Go figure.

      Delete
    6. anon 11:58, a more plausible explanation is that you are a nitwit.

      Delete
    7. AC/ MA,
      Fuck the white working class. Unless, of course, you're a big "identity politics" guy.

      Delete
  2. DiC - 2.5% PCE YoY. The hits just keep on coming.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Harris's nomination was not democratic. Members of the Democratic party didn't have a chance to vote for her or not. The Democratic Party is a private organization that didn't bother with a nominating process at all. A private organization controls who will run for president, not the voters. This is our situation for the last three presidential elections.

    The Democratic party has been taken over by insiders that shut out the will of the people who support them. So we have to assume they will run the country the same way, catering to the will and desires of insiders over the will of the people. Given this, why should people without Daddy issues be excited by the Democratic Party?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. For the most part, this election will be like 2020, a rejection of Trump, who is as corrupt as one can get.

      Having said that, Biden/Harris has governed better than expected and there is now excitement in the air about Harris, that is different than 2020, and a bit more like 2008.

      Delete
    2. There seems to be quite a bit of excitement among registered Democrats. And the general election is about winning over independents and swing voters, who probably couldn’t care less about the nominating process.

      Delete
    3. How can people take seriously claims that Donald Trump is a threat to democracy if those claims are made by the corporation that controls the Democratic Party and subverts democracy in their own nominating process?

      If you really want to understand the Trump phenomenon, consider that he may not be a threat to democracy as much as he is a byproduct of its absence.

      Delete
    4. In part, the answer to your dumb question is that nobody takes your nonsense seriously.

      You are just the latest troll come lately, with your obvious bait-to-trigger ploy.

      I am not trying to persuade or dissuade you, your moronic comments are amusing and your MAGA tears are delightful, but you are barking up the wrong tree.

      Speaking of delightful, try combining drum legend Narada Michael Walden with guitar legend Tommy Bolin:

      https://youtu.be/_-jjVeWS_y4?si=IrOvndF8C4H4FeIx

      Delete
    5. Trump is a miserable and unhappy person that is not just a threat to democracy, he seems hell bent on ending both the Republican Party and our society, replacing it instead with an oligarchy achieved through fascism.

      Many leading Republican voices say Trump is unfit to be president, including Thomas Sowell.

      As others have noted, most Americans now want Trump to drop out.

      So in reality we will likely come out of this with democracy strengthened, it all depends on how the electorate votes.

      Delete
    6. Anonymouse 1:34pm, according to anonymouse commenters (who defended Biden, tooth and toenail, all the way) a duly elected president was pressured by billionaire donors to bow out of running for reelection.

      Why would it surprise you that anyone questioned the democratic values within the Democratic Party?

      Especially since the party pols and donors will allow Biden to continue on in a position that THEY said he could not fulfill.

      Delete
    7. 1:54 your premise is false, so your conclusions are irrelevant.

      Whether Biden stayed or dropped out has nothing to do with "democratic values".

      The discourse about Biden dropping out was primarily driven by corporate media looking to gin up a horse race.

      Dems that wanted Biden to drop out were worried about him not being capable of campaigning in such a way that could defeat Trump.

      Your cynicism is noted, hope you find peace someday, but until then you will just have to cope.

      Delete
    8. No one says he is unfit to be president, Cecelia. It was (apparently) his campaigning skills that were at issue. Those are two different things.

      And yes, some of us defended Biden, and still do. Is that supposed to be a mark against us? He has been a good president in my opinion. I was not on the dump Biden bandwagon, but I’m happy to support Harris. Sue me.

      Delete
    9. 1:34: It seems like there are some strong feelings about this topic, but I think it's important to stay focused on the issue at hand. The question I posed is about the credibility of claims regarding Trump being a threat to democracy, especially when those claims come from the Democratic Party, which has utilized undemocratic practices itself.

      Personal attacks and insults don't help us get to the truth of the matter. Instead, let’s look at the evidence and the logical arguments:

      The Democratic Party didn't hold a nominating process for Harris. Therefore, many will scrutinize their own adherence to democratic principles. Their subversion of democracy in their nominating process may undermine their credibility in claims about Trump. It doesn’t automatically invalidate any individual claims about Trump also subverting of democracy like the Democratic Party did in their nomination process for Harris. But it may weaken the individual general claim that he is a threat to Democracy.

      Let's try to address the substance of the argument rather than resorting to personal attacks.

      Delete
    10. Ortega is possibly my favorite of all 20th century philosophers mostly on the basis of books other than his most famous one. Glad TDH is making use of him. As for the charge that Harris did not receive the nomination by a [d]emocratic vote, I would make further use of Ortega: he famously wrote that "I am myself plus my circumstances." I cannot become who I am except through them, by "reabsorbing" them; without them, I am not really or fully existent. In the present instance, the circumstances surrounding Harris (or anyone else) becoming the nominee instead of Biden make this charge quite dumb.

      Delete
    11. You so butthurt you need to get on a Whaaaaambulance. No Democrat gives a shit about the process, just stopping the weirdo fascists, their Project 2025, and their weirdo CF out on bail attempted coupe man.

      Delete
    12. Anonymices, you are manipulating the situation. The issue at hand was Biden's age and mental capabilities. The decline in his cognitive abilities, evident during the debate, prompted calls for him to withdraw. Biden has been in politics for many years, so any decline in his campaigning skills would be connected to cognitive decline.

      Anonymices had refused to acknowledge that Biden may no longer be fit for presidency and instead pointed fingers at wealthy donors and party leaders for the controversy.

      It’s contradictory to argue for Biden to stay in office after questioning his abilities to debate and to stump on the campaign trail. Allowing him to stay in office after pressuring him not to run again is the stuff of big money and party honchos. This disregards the voters and is purely a power move. The irony is heightened by the fact that just two days ago, the same individuals were defending all of Biden's abilities wholeheartedly.

      Delete
    13. Mmmmk, Cecelia. Whatevs.

      Delete
    14. Cecelia, I am still defending Biden’s abilities. I did not demand his ouster. But now that he has bowed out, I am happy to support Harris. You can’t seem to process this simple concept.

      Delete
    15. Anonymouse 2:45pm, right. You now insult anyone who makes the same argument as the democracy of big money pressure that you did two days ago.

      “Whatevs” as to m anonymices talking out both sides of their mouths in post after post after post.. indeed.

      Delete
    16. Let me explain this again, Cecelia. I want a Democrat to win and I want to beat Trump. I can simultaneously criticize the media and the “elites” for trying to force Biden out but also support the new presumptive nominee because I am a Democrat, just like Somerby claims he is. It wasn’t my decision, but Biden dropped out, so I will support Harris, whom I also like. You seem to be bugged about that, for some reason.

      Delete
    17. Anonymouse 2:49pm,. It’s fine to blast another commenter for questioning the DNC mouth service to democracy as long as you’re fairly optimistic as to success of such arrangement.Who cares how you feel about being rightfully labeled as a hypocrite. I don’t know why you bothered to comment.



      .

      Delete
    18. I am not the anonymous that commented earlier.

      Delete
    19. Here, Cecelia. I am 2:49 and 3:01 but not 1:34. Is that the commenter that hurt your fee fees?

      Delete
    20. Anonymouse 3:01pm, no one argued with you about your silky thoughts and feelings.

      An anonymouse made a valid comment as to your party being “democratic ” based upon the recent controversy. An anonymices scolded her for those comments when they were voicing frustration over billionaire donors as recently as two days ago.

      Delete
    21. Not 1:34, I directly address “anonymices” in my post. Unless you’re possessed, you understood that I meant the two anonymous posts that came directly after my statement,

      Delete
    22. I’m possessed. That’s why I vote Republican.

      Delete
    23. Anonymouse 3:29pm, nah. You’re merely a garden variety anonymouse flying monkey. That’s the reason you lie.

      Delete
    24. Cecelia, you can redeem yourself — vote for Kamala.

      Delete

    25. @1:50 Not “say” but “once said”. I am not certain but Sowell may have made this statement before Sowell’s actual performance as President showed that he was capable indeed qualified to be President

      In any case, Sowell strongly prefers Trump over his Democratic adversary.

      Delete
    26. Yes Cecelia let us talk about Democracy and coup plotters and men who want to be dictators. WTF?

      Delete
    27. 1:12, Trump to oil companies give me a billion dollars and I will do anything you want.

      Delete
    28. Cecilia, i disagree with your stance. Biden's debater performance was a disaster, and that is why he had to withdraw. I'm not worried about the country's survival until January when the new POTUS is installed. Biden isn't senile, and the government largely runs by itself. Why do you think trump is fit to be president? We survived his first term, but who knows about his next?

      Delete
    29. Cecelia,
      Long time, no hear.
      When, exactly, was it you started having problems with contradictions?

      Delete
    30. Cecelia,
      Which do you love more, the deficit or the corporate tax breaks Trump handed out which caused it?

      Delete
    31. There is nothing contradictory about a woman who hates herself, voting Republican.

      Delete
    32. mouth service is not a thing. The phrase is lip service. European troll farm workers don’t know English idioms.

      Delete
    33. I know American English idioms.

      Delete
    34. AC/MA, Biden, an elected president, would have never been pressured to reconsider re-election over one bad debate night. It wasn’t a situation where Biden looked tense, tired, anxious and annoyed. He wasn’t terse or distracted.

      On the contrary it was much worse. Biden was confused, dazed, forgetful, mumbling, and irrelevant in his answers. That is why he won’t be running for re-election.

      Due to cognitive impairment, Biden has made the decision not to seek a second term. As the current commander in chief, he holds the ultimate authority in making critical decisions and possesses privileges that are unique and are his alone. This authority is granted to him by the people. These same people did not vote for Biden’s cabinet or donors.

      If Biden can’t be trusted with all the authority of office in 1/2025, he shouldn’t be there now. A presidency by committee is not the process and never has been although past presidents have surreptitiously been sidelined over physical illness in the past.

      This is what we have right now, and we’ll live with it. However, there’s not a citizen of this country who doesn’t have grounds to question the Democratic Party’s commitment to democracy due to this situation. They can and should do it no matter how many anonymices contest them via arguments that contradict the ones that these same anonymices had waged the day before.







      Delete
    35. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    36. Cecelia is right, Biden should resign, so Kamala can run as the incumbent.

      Delete
    37. Anonymouse 10:36pm, you may be the only cognitive anonymouse in the world.

      Delete
    38. Cecelia is right again.

      Delete
    39. Interesting Bob's post the day after the election was title
      "IMITATIONS: Something of consequence happened last night!"

      Here's a comment from DinC and a reply from a DNC bot:

      David in CalJune 28, 2024 at 10:47 AM
      So, what are the odds that Biden is replaced as candidate?
      AnonymousJune 28, 2024 at 10:48 AM
      zero probability, unless he has a stroke or dies


      Here's the comment I made which is kind of interesting:

      AnonymousJune 28, 2024 at 11:54 AM
      "We at this site have tried to describe the universe within which Blue America's insistence on denial has been operating in the course of the past year."

      It's so true. The "shouting down" and "insistence on denial" cult was so effective for such a long time and last night it ran into a brick wall. It will be very interesting to see the fallout. Biden is toast. It wasn't a "cold" and he won't be getting better. It's over. If he runs, Trump wins. Probably in a landslide. The cult can shout that down and insist on denying it - if they want. But that fair has moved on. Trump is going to be the next president, unless they find a way to kill him. The salient issue is if the cult of "shouting down" and "insistence on denial", which starts at the very top of the Blue hierarchy, will come to terms with what that tactic has wrought.


      The plan from the top the whole time was to shout it down and gaslight. The debate changed all that and made it impossible to continue. The debate made people see that Biden is suffering from some kind of dementia and in no condition whatsoever to be president. This shined a light on the media with people asking the obvious question, 'How did you not know this?' So the media that had been helping the DNC gaslight Biden's diminishment were forced to pretend like they were doing their job and call them on it. They had no choice. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kKUye23KBQ

      That's what started it. The "shouting down" and "insistence on denial" tactic was over - so it was matter of the elder insiders 1. Getting ole' Joe and his family to come to terms with it 2. Engineering a way to replace him with a someone who was as controllable and free of morals as Joe without any kind of election.

      Wait, sorry, the plan was 1. Kill Trump and we're good. And if that doesn't work 2. Get ole' Joe and his family of upstarts to come to terms with it 3. Engineering a way to replace him with a someone who was as morally maleable as Joe without any kind of election.

      That's what happened. It will still change more from this. I doubt Harris will end up as the candidate. But she could beat Trump for sure. The DNC elders will engineer a torrent of tumult. They may try to kill him again. It's going to be wild. But they will not lose to Trump again. They will not let that happen even if it means engineering a coup.

      Delete
    40. day after the "debate"

      Delete
    41. 9:54,
      There really isn't any correlation between the a presidential debate and the actual work that a sitting president will do. And there never will be an instance where a sitting president is required to give a snappy answer in 60 seconds. You have to understand that the prospect of DJT regaining power is so alarming and frightening that cannot be allowed to happen. We needed a younger more aggressive candidate willing to throw the bullshit Trump spews back in his orange painted face. I hope that clears it up for you.

      Delete
    42. Anyhow, the way forward is clear: vote for Kamala.

      Delete
  4. I’m a Bush Obama Romney Clinton Trump voter. What’s in it for me?

    ReplyDelete
  5. I'm a Russian troll. If I could vote in your elections, I'd vote for Trump, Vance, and every Republican.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Kevin shares the good news about manufacturing. Surely this will inspire working-class whites to vote for Kamala.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Early debate in June was THE issue that led to Biden’s fall. Who convinced him to agree to a June debate (instead of the usual September)? Kamala Harris is the obvious beneficiary, but she is too stupid to engineer anything this clever. My 2c: it’s some senior staffer/boss who will move from Biden’s team to Kamala where he/she can mooch for the next 4 to 8 years.

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2024/07/26/who_engineered_the_political_coup_against_biden___151336.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ya think Occam's razor would lead to thinking four years of press coverage that Biden is old and a debate that was a disaster display of old would lead to his handing off to Harris? Rather than a bunch of dumbshit conspiracy theories? Not to remind you of the obvious, the only autogolpe coup plotters are the jaggoffs and weirdos who plotted 1/6. Answer me why isn't Pence at least endorsing the orange fart bomb convicted felon and fraudster?

      Delete
  8. A media criticism blog is the perfect place to gloat that Biden made the media look like fools.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Somerby could have read Revolt of the Masses but instead he reads something about that book, and only the very beginning of that. This is how an intellectually lazy person pretends to be a thinker. I suspect Somerby tried to fake his way through Harvard the same way, but you can’t be a philosophy major or a lit major without doing the reading. Like a worm, Somerby blames his teacher instead of his own lack of effort.

    ReplyDelete
  10. "Earning $75 an hour sounds impressive! How do you navigate through the challenges of working different shifts from home? It sounds like a journey filled with growth and accomplishment! 💰"Discover the path to limitless possibilities.🙂
    Here ➠➠➠➠➠ https://Www.Join.Payathome9.Com/

    ReplyDelete