WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 18, 2024
Anthropology all the way down: Winston Churchill famously described the Soviet Union of his day as "a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma."
Somewhat similarly, our nation's failing national discourse is often a clown-car inside a hall of mirrors driven by a bunch of con men.
By music men—and music women, or perhaps by a herd of Stepfords. Consider what happened again last night on the highest-rated TV show in all of "cable news" land.
For today, we won't depress you with the latest numbers from Nielsen. That said, the Fox News Channel clown-car, The Five, is that highest-rated "cable news" program. Yesterday, its Stepfords were once again assailing the dimwittedness of Vice President Harris, who lost last month's presidential election to the brilliant Candidate Trump.
The Stepfords were in their standard fine form, the better to sell their corporate owner's various talking-points with. Robotically, they recited the points their owners had placed on their messaging sheets.
Finally, it came time for Judge Jeanine to declaim.
For today, we'll spare you the checkered history of this illustrious "cable news" magistrate. Soon, though, here came da judge! As you can see by clicking this link, the judge was emphatically saying this:
JUDGE JEANINE (12/17/24): I think that the problem with Kamala Harris is that the woman is so inept, so incompetent, she is so inarticulate that she was a joke. She was! I mean, I don't know what she stood for. I don't know why anyone would even think she's got a chance at winning any other seat at any other race...
She didn't try to get new voters when she couldn't even perform with her own voters. She underperformed with blacks, she underperformed with the youth, and she had no interest in doing conservative media. She wasn't interested in the—I was reading about the monoculture that sports is. Nobody owns sports. That was a place for her to go in and she didn't bother.
And yet, Trump was smart enough. A lot is attributable to Barron. I mean, he understood the value of social media, how viral it goes when you capture something and then it continues to spread. And she just didn't get it.
I mean, she had no message. She had nothing. And in the end, it's a slap in the face to the Democrat [sic] Party that she was even their candidate. She couldn't articulate how she was different than Joe. The woman is—she's just inept.
She wouldn't even do sports! It's astounding to think that the Democrat [sic] Party got stuck with someone like her!
This remains standard fare on the gruesome "imitation of life" known as the Fox News Channel. On programs like The Five, Harris is still the dumbest, stupidest, inexplicably worst presidential candidate ever.
On that same channel's Gutfeld! show, she's still being mocked as "a drunk."
Let's get back to the judge, whose gruesome history we're setting aside for today.
The judge was performing like a trained seal, or possibly more like a Stepford. In fairness, the other players had taken their turns trashing Harris before the judge stepped in.
That said, the sheer stupidity of Fox News culture is routinely put on display when the Stepfords perform this particular script. We're even able to make ourselves find their behavior amusing.
Go ahead! Just riddle us this:
If Harris was the worst candidate ever, what exactly does that say about their champion, the fabulous Candidate Trump? These denunciations of Candidate Harris routinely coexist with declarations of his North Korean-adjacent greatness. So how, then, do the corporate Stepfords pretend to explain this?
Nationwide popular vote (to date), 2024
Donald J. Trump (R): 77,300,739 (49.80%)
Kamala Harris (D): 75,014,534 (48.33%)
The riddle here would occur to almost any human. If Harris was the worst candidate ever, why did the greatest political strongman only manage to defeat her by less than 1.5 points?
How do the Stepfords square that circle? Of course! In the obvious way!
They square the circle by the prehuman process known as "sifting." Their channel's viewers are never told how close the nationwide vote really was. Instead, the Stepfords echo Trump's own language, finding a thousand different ways to convey the impression that he won this year's election in some sort of a landslide.
This is the existing state of what's left of our nation's "discourse." The woods are lovely, dark and deep, but the fact that people can be paid to behave this way is a lesson in anthropology.
Judge Jeanine is a lesson all by herself, a lesson in anthropology pretty much all the way down! We've spared you her journalistic history, which seems to emerge from a car.
Fuller disclosure: This goes on all night every night. On weekends, it can get even more phony and dumber.
This bullroar is broadcast to millions of voters. Over here in Blue America, our highly educated elites politely avert their gaze.
Bob wrote, "If Harris was the worst candidate ever, what exactly does that say about their champion, the fabulous Candidate Trump?"
ReplyDeleteTrump had enormous disadvantages. He was the most hated person in America. The media was something like 3/4 positive for Harris and 3/4 negative for Trump. The media told lie after lie to discredit Trump. She had 3 times a much money. Jan 6.
For Trump to come close was remarkable.
See https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2024/12/the-daily-chart-media-lies.php
DeleteNot to mention that most of her alleged votes were allegedly received in states with no voter id requirement.
He was the most hated person in America.
DeleteThere is a very good reason for that, Dickhead in Cal. Don't despair, Dickhead, he's starting his Retribution Tour Now, should be plenty entertaining for fascist fanboys like you. I can't wait to see how he destroys the economy.
"The media told lie after lie to discredit Trump."
DeleteSorry, but no. Coverage of Trump was more negative because he regularly did or said awful things.
Please, fellow commenter, please please please pay attention to me, regardless of my partisanship and utter lunacy.
DeletePlease, I beg you, please please pay attention to me.
I’m so lonely, I even have to make up lies about myself.
I humiliate myself everyday here with my right wing misinformation and word salads, but please pay attention to me.
Please.
I beg you.
Please.
David in Cal,
DeleteWhat's a falsehood?
Asking for 78 million Trump voters who believed Haitians were eating pet dogs and cats.
David, there are 40 items on the list you linked at the far-right Powerline blog. Many of them aren't even about Trump. Some they list as "hoaxes" aren't hoaxes at all. Others require a relaxed definition of "mainstream media" to be included on a list of media lies.
DeleteStop posting garbage.
Hoax?
DeleteThe Trump campaign and Donald Trump himself were aware in real time of Russian efforts to intervene in the 2016 presidential election. The campaign had a heads-up that Russia had stolen Democratic emails. And Russian operatives sought and received a meeting with senior Trump campaign officials promising “dirt” on Trump’s opponent. As the campaign wore on, and the Russian efforts were increasingly made public, Trump personally and publicly encouraged them.
The Trump campaign was run for a time by a man with an ongoing business relationship with a Russian intelligence operative, to whom he gave proprietary internal polling data.
The Trump campaign did not discourage Russian activity on its behalf. In fact, it sought repeatedly to coordinate its messaging around WikiLeaks releases of information. The campaign, and Trump personally, sought to contact WikiLeaks to receive information in advance about releases and may well have succeeded.
The campaign sought to obtain disparaging information about Hillary Clinton from actors who either were Russian operatives or it believed were Russian operatives. It did so through a number of means—some of these efforts were direct. Some were indirect.
"No collusion."
"Stop posting garbage." LOL!
DeleteThat's a good one.
Quaker - the "hoax" is referring to an accusation that the Trump campaign colluded or conspired or coordinated with Russia in its election interference activities.
DeleteThe hoax is that Trump denies what he was obviously doing.
DeleteThere was actually an obscene amount of overt, anti-Trump propaganda in the Washington Post in the months before the election.
DeleteHere is one example out of hundreds:
Trump nearly took over the D.C. police force. City leaders pushed back.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/10/25/trump-security-dc-police-force/
The reality is Trump discussed, but didn't act on, federal control over D.C. police during 2020 protests. The headline’s use of "nearly" suggests a close call, yet even the D.C. Police Chief described it as "theatrics".
The article tries to shape public perception by implying Trump’s actions in 2020 were a near-execution of authoritarian control. They do this by using charged language and selective sources. This stokes fear of a second term, blurring distinctions between his consideration, tactic, and intent.
An unbiased headline would read something like:
"City Officials Reflect on Trump's Consideration of Federal Oversight of D.C. Police Amid 2020 Protests"
There's literally hundreds of examples like this.
7:27 PM Actually, Trump didn't need Russia's help and Russia didn't have the means to help meaningfully him. I realize you may believe otherwise. But I would respectfully suggest that you have been led to believe otherwise by people who benefit from you doing so. I admit it sounds crazy.
Delete"And Russian operatives sought and received a meeting with senior Trump campaign officials promising “dirt” on Trump’s opponent."
DeleteQuaker - according to the Mueller Report (pages 110-122) These people were:
A lawyer who had been a prosecutor in Moscow in the late nineties, her interpreter, a British music publicist, a man who worked for a Russian oligarch whose son is a Russian pop star - that the British man manages.
They did promise “dirt” on Trump’s opponent though. But it was never brought up in the meeting - which lasted 20 minutes as you know from reading the report.
"the 'hoax' is referring to an accusation that the Trump campaign colluded or conspired or coordinated with Russia in its election interference activities."
DeleteOh, no. Not at all. Refer to David's list of "media lies." The very first item on the list says simply: "Russian collusion," very broadly and inclusively. There's none of the specificity or nuance you claim.
Quakes:
DeleteAlso: "And Russian operatives sought and received a meeting with senior Trump campaign officials promising “dirt” on Trump’s opponent. "
Just for the record - as you know from reading the Mueller Report - the person who conceived and wrote the email seeking the meeting was the British music publicist.
"Oh, no. Not at all. Refer to David's list of "media lies." The very first item on the list says simply: "Russian collusion," very broadly and inclusively. There's none of the specificity or nuance you claim."
DeleteOh. OK. What is the difference?
From your own link, Nonny Mouse @7:32
Delete“If you don’t dominate your city and your state, they’re gonna walk away with you,” the president told governors during a phone call that day, according to a transcript of the exchange obtained by CNN. “And we’re doing it in Washington, in D.C. we’re going to do something that people haven’t seen before. But we’re going to have total domination.”
That's not just "consideration." That's a plan.
What would you like "Russian collusion" to mean Quaker?
Delete"That's not just "consideration." That's a plan."
DeleteO.K. - and to you that means Trump nearly took over the D.C. police force?
"Just for the record - as you know from reading the Mueller Report - the person who conceived and wrote the email seeking the meeting was the British music publicist."
DeleteAnd? If he's British does that mean he can't be on the Russian team?
Anyway, forget Mueller. Try the Senate Select Intelligence Committee report. It was prepared under Republican leadership and is far more detailed.
You think "we're going to have total domination" is just fish talk?
DeleteTry the Senate Select Intelligence Committee report for what?
Delete"You think "we're going to have total domination" is just fish talk?" I don't know what that means but I disagree that it means Trump nearly took over the D.C. police force, which is the accusation the headline makes. Is there anything from my own link that supports an accusation that Trump nearly took over the D.C. police force? I don't see any which is why I point it out as an example of anti-Trump propaganda.
Delete"Trump and senior Campaign officials sought to obtain advance information about WikiLeaks through Roger Stone. In spring 2016, prior to Assange's public announcements, Stone advised the Campaign that WikiLeaks would be releasing materials harmful to Clinton. Following the July 22 DNC release, Trump and the Campaign believed that Roger Stone had known of the release and had inside access to WikiLeaks, and repeatedly communicated with Stone about WikiLeaks throughout the summer and fall of 2016. Trump and other senior Campaign officials specifically directed Stone to obtain information about upcoming document releases relating to Clinton and report back. At their direction, Stone took action to gain inside knowledge for the Campaign and shared his purported knowledge directly with Trump and senior Campaign officials on multiple occasions. Trump and the Campaign believed that Stone had inside information and expressed satisfaction that Stone's information suggested more releases would be forthcoming."
DeleteYes. And what would you like to say this means about Russian collusion?
DeleteDid the report determine the extent of authentic, non-public knowledge about WikiLeaks that Stone obtained and shared with the Campaign?
EarthQuake:
DeleteThe interesting thing about that episode, since it seems to interest you, is the text messages between Stone and Wikileaks. I'll see if I can find them for you. They may be in the Senate Report.
Another very interesting thing is the absolutely incredible interview that Amy Goodman did with Julian Assange about Wikileak's relationship with Roger Stone. It's so incredibly fascinating.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNdG6iE4a84
"Trump and other senior Campaign officials specifically directed Stone to obtain information about upcoming document releases relating to Clinton and report back."
DeleteIf Trump was colluding with Russia, why would he be in the dark about this?
Quakerpants:
Delete"And? If he's British does that mean he can't be on the Russian team?"
Please do let us all know if you have any evidence or reason to believe he's a "Russian operative".
9:22 The document releases were not from the Russians. They were from Wikileaks. The interview with Assange referred to by 8:49 does nothing to dispel the fact that his agency actively supported the Trump campaign by selectively hacking and making public the contents of Clinton campaign emails. Manafort for his part obstructed a senate investigation into his activities with a Russian agent while serving as Trump’s campaign manager, by not testifying about them. Nothing suspicious about that.
Delete
Delete@3:57 AM,
alas, all these fantastic stories only happened in your sick Soros-bot imagination.
None of that proves the accusation of collusion and conspiracy between Trump and Russia. As we know, the matter has been settled for years. Even Manafort's activities with the Ukrainian man who had worked for him since 2004, helping him with polling, and who you call a Russian agent without evidence. Yes .. the man who received polling data from the Trump campaign manager, who was later fired, 5 months before the election.
DeleteIf all of that is suspicious to you, there's nothing you can do about it. It was investigated twice by large, long, well funded professional investigations and both settled the matter without any indictments for the charge of collusion or conspiracy or anything to do with the accusation that Trump was coordinating with Russia. The notion he was was brought up during the election by the Clinton campaign who produced bogus evidence to try to back it up and after years the matter has been settled and put to bed. It didn't happen. That's why people call it a hoax.
Interesting Quaker makes accusations and then slinks off without defending them. He can't defend a matter that was settled years ago. Nor can you, if you are not him, which you are. But isn't the interview with Assange incredible!!!?
The bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee that investigated Manafort’s ties to the Russians labeled them a “grave counterintelligence threat”, specifying that his communication with a Russian agent occurred before and after the 2016 election. I think that I will believe them rather than some anonymous commenter who disputes them.
DeleteBelieve whatever you want. The matter has long been settled. Believing Manafort’s ties to his employee was a grave counterintelligence threat is not evidence that Trump was colluding or conspiring or coordinating with Russia - the accusation that was brought up by the Clinton campaign with manufactured evidence in August of 2016 and has long ago been settled by investigations that concluded there was no evidence to support the claim.
DeleteThe Senate Intelligence Committee was headed by Republicans, was 5 volumes in size and comprehensive. Trump told the committee that he did not recall conversations that he had with Roger Stone on multiple occasions about the Wikileaks email hacking. So yeah, I will believe the committee, and certainly not a Russian agent and his contact in Trump’s organization, nor Trump’s bs.
Delete7:38,
DeleteIf it's what you say, I love it, especially later in the Summer.
The House Committee on Un-American Activities also produced a bunch of exciting shit, including recommendation to lock up all Americans of Japanese descent in concentration camps.
DeleteHUAC targeted supposed communists not Japanese. FDR interned Japanese via an executive order in 1942. HUAC conducted its hearings during the 1950s after the war had ended.
Delete
Delete"The media told lie after lie to discredit Trump. "
Don't forget the polling industry, working for Comma-la, constantly lying in her behalf, like J. Ann Selzer, Democrat operative.
"Quaker makes accusations and then slinks off"
DeleteCorrecting your posts is not my full time job. I do so only by my own choice in my own time. Otherwise, raspberries to you.
Oh. I thought it was because you posted idiotic non sequiturs implying Trump's comment "we're going to have total domination" justified the Post's headline that Trump "nearly took over the D.C. police force", and that you feel Rob Goldstone could be a "russian agent" and that because the Trump campaign was asking Roger Stone to contact Wikileaks, it says something meaningful about "Russian collusion". All pretty dumb and uninformed assertions. So it was a good time to choose not post!
Delete
ReplyDelete"Their channel's viewers are never told how close the nationwide vote really was."
That's because their channel's viewers aren't idiots who think the nationwide total means something in an American presidential election.
anon 2:55 - you ignore TDH's point - if Harris was the worst candidate in history, and Trump next to perfect, how was it that he only won by less that 1.5% of the popular vote.
DeleteTrump doesn't acknowledge that he won by 1.5%. He keeps saying it was the biggest landslide in history.
Delete@Soros-bots 6:33 PM and 7:26 PM
DeleteDon't be idiots. But it's probably too late for you.
The game is to win electoral college votes, and Trump won 312 to 226, while spending about one third of what Harris spent. That's certainly a landslide.
Had the game been to win the popular vote, The Donald would've run a completely different campaign, and probably won easily 90% of the popular vote.
The Donald would have lost every Republican voter, if he tried to run an election campaign not based on bigotry.
DeleteWe don't know how much Trump spent (or was spent on his behalf).
DeleteComma-la-la spent $1 billion, and the Donald $300-something K.
DeleteAnd yes: the state-run media were advertising Comma-la-la for free, 24X7. But let's ignore it.
Donald spent $300K - how stupid are you? Fo,x OAN, Newsmax is state run media? Seriously? Do you need help tying your shoes? Cleaning the spittle off your chin?
DeleteThat's because their channel's viewers are idiots who don't think.
ReplyDeletePolls indicate that a majority of voters that closely or moderately follow news media, voted for Harris.
ReplyDeleteSomerby’s entire thesis is wrongheaded.
Corporate media is garbage and has an outsized influence among politicians and pundits, but is not particularly influential among the electorate, and was not determinative in this election.
DeleteThat's why I get all my news from reliable sources. Like Joe Rogan!
DeleteSomerby does not criticize Rogan, but there are tons of independent media that offer daily criticisms of corporate media outlets like Rogan and Fox News.
DeleteIn a blind poll, a majority of Republicans prefer Harris’ policies over Trump’s.
ReplyDeleteRepublicans polled the day before the election: the economy is in ruin, society is in decline
DeleteRepublicans polled the day after the election: the economy is booming, everything is fine
This afternoon, Rev. Johnson was all set to get a stopgap funding bill through the House to keep the government open. President Musk stepped in and put a stop to that nonsense!
ReplyDeleteYes, the guy who poured 250 million dollars into Trump's campaign and regularly promoted anti- Harris propaganda on X needs to have his day now. With many more to follow.
DeleteMusk should step in and finance the government himself.
DeleteYou don't get to be a billionaire by spending your own money.
DeleteThe day is going to come, sooner than later, that Tubby grows jealous of Musk stealing his spotlight. It's gonna be ugly.
DeleteTrump's dementia didn't go away when he was elected. He may be too far gone to realize what is happening these days, as long as he gets his good news every day and people call him Mr. President and don't refer to Musk that way, Musk is probably safe.
DeleteThat's why we need to get "President Musk" trending.
DeleteThe demographics of Tesla buyers may ultimately be problematic for Musk if he continues down this road and finds himself to have overplayed his hand here.
DeleteThank Ramaswamy for reading the entire 1500 page bill and seeing how bad it is for ordinary people. We dodged a bullet!
DeleteEvery dollar not budgeted to police is a win.
DeleteSomerby does not run a blog, he runs a factory, where he assiduously manufactures ignorance, to ease his bitterness and please his minders.
ReplyDeleteIt introduces unnecessary confusion to refer to the Fox hosts as Stepfords or circus clown-car clowns. Why not refer to them as what they are -- hired propagandists promoting Republican disinformation in the guise of entertainment.
ReplyDeleteWhen Somerby refers to these people as Stepfords, he implies that someone is controlling them and forcing them to be compliant. It removes the gender role aspect from the original film and book, in which men killed their wives and replaced them with compliant robots designed to please their husbands. There is nothing of that in any of the Fox performers. Clowns in clown cars are performers but their goal is to entertain people and distract them from the set up of the next circus act, in a live circus. That is not the role of Judge Jeanine or anyone else on Fox. Their role is to put across the misinformation and disinformation dictated by their right wing management and writers, to tell viewers what to think about a variety of issues and to evoke outrage and anger at designated targets, including maligning the left, as they were doing when they discussed Harris (who isn't running for anything now but must still be vilified in the name of hate and for the joy of feeling angry (and thus more alive with that adrenaline flowing?).
There is no reason for Somerby to conflate the disaster at Fox with an important story or with childhood memories of clowns, the way he constantly does. Why does he do this? It doesn't help understanding. It perhaps makes some of the nostalgia or childhood pleasure rub off on Fox's propagandists. It doesn't help anyone understand what is going on at Fox any better than a straightforward analysis would do. Is he no longer capable of that kind of writing? It appears not.
This is what good political humor looks like. Somerby should Google political comedy for other examples.
ReplyDelete"WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Republican members of the House Ethics Committee revealed on Wednesday that they decided to release their report on former congressman Matt Gaetz when they realized that their voters do not read.
Speaking on condition of anonymity, one GOP committee member said, “The report is riddled with words that are far too long for people who had to google ‘tariff.’”
Explaining the Republicans’ about-face on releasing the report, he said, “It took us a second to remember that our base reads at a Tuberville level.”
The congressman noted that Republicans joined with Democrats on the vote, adding, “One of the only ideas that has bipartisan support in Congress is that Matt Gaetz is a dick.”
https://www.borowitzreport.com/p/republicans-release-gaetz-report
It's funny because it is so true...
"It's funny because it is so true..."
ReplyDeleteThat must be why the person who says Republican voters only care about bigotry and white supremacy is the comedian of the century.