SATURDAY, MARCH 29, 2025
We finally decided to check: Last night, it was the same old thing on the primetime "cable news" propaganda show, Gutfeld!.
The misogyny was undisguised; liberal women were too fat. As for Governor Walz, he was gay gay gay gay gay gay, as is routinely the case on this program.
We're not big fans of Walz ourselves, but on this show, he's gay gay gay.
This is the garbage can our own Blue elites have chosen to ignore. This was last night's lineup:
Gutfeld! lineup: March 28, 2025
Vince August: comedian
Kennedy: former MTV VJ
Greg Gutfeld: "former print journalist proudly fired from three magazines in the ’90s and early aughts" (Variety)
Tom Shillue: comedian, Fox News contributor
Hotep Jesus: introduced as "host of The Grift Report"
To see the intros, click here.
That was the lineup for last evening, an evening during which Walz was gay gay gay gay gay At long last, after all this time, a question finally popped into our heads:
Who the heck is Hotep Jesus? We finally decided to check!
Let it be said that Hotep Jesus is an occasional guest on this overtly misogynistic, but also gay bashing, "news" program. Let it also be said that he's a genial presence on the show, though he also never challenges its disordered drift.
He smiles a lot—a good thing to do—but who the Sam Hill is he? Your answer starts with a brief explanation of a certain term:
Hoteps
Hoteps espouse a mixture of black radicalism and social conservatism, often through generating social media content on sites such as Twitter and Instagram. Members of the subculture promote conspiracy theories, often through internet memes, as well as inaccurate historical claims. Hoteps often denounce homosexuality and interracial marriage, promote the view that Black women should be subordinate to Black men, and oppose LGBT rights and feminism, which they view as inimical to Black liberation. A substantial number of hoteps promote antisemitic conspiracy theories. Commentator Matthew Sheffield wrote in 2018 that "a significant portion of self-identified hoteps have so much in common with far-right white nationalism" that the subculture "has been dubbed the 'ankh right' by some of its black critics" (a play on the term "alt-right").
[...]
In the 1930s, hotep ideology originated in the Islam-inspired teachings of Wallace Fard Muhammad, a door-to-door salesman and founder of the American black nationalist organization Nation of Islam. Claiming he was the incarnation of Noble Drew Ali, Muhammad "borrowed from traditional Islamic behavioral practices" to create "a myth designed especially to appeal to African Americans." Prominent members included Malcolm X and Elijah Muhammad.
[...]
Critics have argued that hotep beliefs are too narrow-minded (they only focus on Ancient Egypt, as opposed to Sub-Saharan Africa and other aspects of African history). Black feminists argue that hoteps perpetuate patriarchy and rape culture by policing women's sexuality and tolerating predatory black men.
That's what the leading authority on this topic says. We can't necessarily say that every word is 100 percent completely and totally right.
If that's the background on the hotep "subculture," who is Hotep Jesus? Here's what the Historica Wiki site says. This seems to be basically accurate:
Hotep Jesus
Hotep Jesus, born Bryan Sharpe, is an African-American media personality and a leader of the Hotep movement. He was [sic] known for his fringe conspiracy theories (which he claimed came mostly from his own "common sense") that the Atlantic slave trade was a myth and was financially unfeasible, that the vast majority of African-Americans were the original Native Americans, that the famed Carthaginian general Hannibal was a black African, that the Roman Empire was a rudimentary civilization which depended on Africa for food, and other controversial views.
Bryan Sharpe was born in Brooklyn, New York City, New York on 1 October 1980, and he became a marketer, performance artist and author. He began his career on Twitter, where he aimed to publish viral tweets; he went on to work as a marketer for 50 Cent's energy drink, and it was during his involvement in the hip-hop industry that he experienced his "spiritual awakening." When a heckler on Twitter asked him if he was "some kind of Hotep Jesus," Sharpe adopted this as his new name. In 2019, he appeared on Joe Rogan's podcast to share his views on black history.
On his interview with Joe Rogan, he claimed that African-Americans were raised to have a "fetus [or possibly "defeatist"] mentality" of seeing white people as oppressors and having a "slave mentality," and he believed that the way to uplift the community would be to educate them on pre-slavery black history such as "Queen Angola," the Songhai Empire, the Mali Empire, Mansa Musa, and other older topics. He also...said that identifying the black community with past kings was better than identifying them with slaves such as Harriet Tubman and Frederick Douglass. Hotep Jesus also claimed that the Carthaginian general Hannibal was black, and that black children in America should study his victories over Rome.
He also claimed that black people were natives of America and were not brought over on slave ships, claiming that Africans from the Malian Empire had migrated along the ocean current to South America and North America during the 13th and 14th centuries.....He also claimed that saying that white people brought African slaves to America connoted that Africans could not have discovered America themselves and built their own boats; he believed that accepting the Atlantic slave trade meant erasing black achievement. While Rogan accepted that the Olmecs had African physical features, he questioned Hotep Jesus's logic in claiming that Africans made up the vast majority of native peoples.
[...]
Hotep Jesus claimed to have contacted the coronavirus after attending the Consumer Electronics Show conference in Las Vegas from 7 to 10 January 2020, blaming it on the presence of "masses" of thousands of Chinese people. He also went to Starbucks stores to share information on stores he believed were racist, and he bullied the store into giving him free coffee so that they would not come off as racist. This viral confrontation earned him an appearance on Fox News, and he started his own online movement, Hotep Nation, which was supportive of Donald Trump and critical of liberalism and progressivism.
As far as we know, the bulk of that clumsily written material is basically accurate. Here's a news report on the Starbucks matter, which comes across as a bit of a prank.
For Hotep's own initial account of his interaction with the "MASSES" of Chinese people in Las Vegas, you can just click this.
("I must have shaken hands with them at least 100 times," he says. Along the way, he seems to say that the early response to the Covid pandemic was an example of "globalists tightening the communist leash around their subjects’ necks.")
You can watch the tape of his 2019 Rogan appearance simply by clicking here. If you watch the first five minutes, you'll get the basic drift.
(You'll note that the genius Rogan does in fact seem to question the claim that Africans discovered and peopled North America long before Columbus arrived. Never let it be said that questionable claims escape analysis on this most-watched podcast in this failing nation, or on a primetime "cable news" program like the astonishing Gutfeld! gong-show.)
For one more look at Hotep Jesus, you can click here to watch an appearance with Tyrus, the former "wrestler," on the official dimwit site, Outkick. Here's the official synopsis of what the fellows discussed:
Should Conservatives Hold Off on Going After Michelle Obama’s Looks? Tyrus and Hotep Jesus Weigh In
Today on the Guy Benson Show, guest host Tyrus and Hotep Jesus weighed in on a number of topics as Trump’s second term kicks off. Hotep Jesus and Tyrus weighed in on COVID mandates and the mRNA vaccine controversy following the pardoning of Anthony Fauci, and then the pair dove into the political movement that led to Trump’s big victory last November. Tyrus also got Hotep Jesus’ take on conservatives bashing Michelle Obama on her looks.
Pitiful, pathetic; sad. For the record:
On the Fox News Channel's Gutfeld! show, Michelle Obama is increasingly revealed to secretly be a man. This is the garbage can whose lid is pried off each weekday night, with a Saturday evening rerun, by CEO Suzanne Scott.
Also, this is the primetime garbage can from which Blue America's journalistic elites have agreed to avert their gaze. Judging from appearances, no one wants to get in a tussle with Fox.
Plus, it's a comedy show!
The manosphere is running wild, as this new guest essay in the New York Times posits. The essay will appear in print in Sunday's editions. This is the headline it carries:
We Underestimate the Manosphere at Our Peril
(The New York Times won't tell you this. We'll pursue this sprawling theme in the upcoming week.)
By the way, was Hannibal black? As you can see by clicking this link, the Communists and the globalists aren't willing to tell you that. You have to turn to the Fox News Channel for TV "news" shows swarming with people who are willing to share such truths.
ReplyDelete"You have to turn to the Fox News Channel for TV "news" shows swarming with people who are willing to share such truths."
Yes, you do, Bob. Every minute of your watching Fox News Channel is making you smarter. And you're getting relief from your horrible TDS. Keep watching it, Bob Somerby.
-----------------
"The misogyny was undisguised; liberal women were too fat. "
What "misogyny"? Are liberal women too fat, or aren't they?
-----------------
If calling Walz gay is gay bashing to you, you must really hate Walz, Bob.
-----------------
And finally: Wikipedia, really? On a political topic? Are you dumb, Bob?
Mao critiquing Somerby's move to the Right is hilarious.
Deleteanon 10:03, what I see is your TLS - (Trump Lickspittle Syndrome)
Delete"We're not big fans of Walz ourselves, but on this show, he's gay gay gay."
ReplyDeleteAnd yet Somerby insists he is liberal. Granted that Walz is not now running for VP, he was, and remarks like this didn't help the Harris/Walz ticket at all. One might argue this is how Trump returned to office. Did Somerby or any of the rest of us have the luxury of being unenthusiastic about our own candidates? The answer is obvious, no, we didn't.
Yes. By criticizing Fox for calling Walz gay, Somerby proves he is right-wing. This is the “reasoning” os the Haters.
DeleteNo, DG, obviously the part of the sentence being criticized was where Somerby said "we're not big fans of Walz ourselves" not the gay part, which is just another right wing attack on Walz and not something Somerby said about his own beliefs.
DeleteIn your haste to bash my comment, you apparently didn't read it.
Yes - You’re either for us or against us. So if you express the slightest qualm, whatsoever, about any Blue politician, that proves you’re on the Red team. And this is how you “reason.”
DeleteSomerby does not qualify his disapproval of Walz, who is one of the most benign and anodyne politicians ever, he just trashes Walz here for no apparent reason other than to reinforce his general disdain for anything that is not right of center.
DeleteThis fantasy that Somerby is not right wing does no harm locally, but this general notion writ large definitely has harmed Dems electorally, all these right wing grifters that have posed as progressive at one point but came clean when their finances permitted - Rogan, Dore, Taibbi, Greenwald, Gabbard, Rubin, etc.
I like Walz.
DeleteDG kind of implies that it is wrong to oppose things. Here are some of the current events I oppose:
Delete1. Preventing seniors from receiving their society security checks.
2. Making Greenland, Panama or Canada into states against their will. Also, giving away Puerto Rico.
3. Abducting and deporting people with the legal right to be here (i.e., documented green card holders and asylum seekers, citizens, tourists on tourist visas they have not overstayed).
4. Sending immigrants to countries they are not from and don't want to live, imprisoning them without evidence of any crime.
5. Removing the accomplishments of women and minorities from museums, public places, websites, textbooks and other appropriate places where the accomplishments of white men are described.
6. Firing people from government and agency jobs without due process (called wrongful termination when it occurs in business).
7. Threatening journalists and lawyers so that they are afraid to do their jobs, which are necessary to maintaining our freedoms in this society.
8. Making war on Houthis (or anyone else) without involvement and direction by the president and approval of Congress.
9. Giving classified info to people who shouldn't have it, whether they are Russians or Chinese spies or journalists without security clearances.
10. Weakening the health of our people by meddling with health care, including denial of abortions and proper treatment after miscarriages, access to vaccines, access to trans care, removal of public health programs and protective measures, forbidding treatment for political reasons.
These are highly polarized issues where there are opposing sides. Is it right for DG to call for everyone to agree when there is so much wrong being done by Trump and Musk and there remains the right of the people (the governed) to express their disagreement and other opinions as guaranteed by the 1st Amendment of the Constitution. Somerby has previously called for unanimity of belief himself, saying that multiculturalism is wrong and dangerous. But our nation still lets us speak our minds, so is it right for DG to complain because some people disagree with others here, or anyone disagrees with Somerby (who is neither God nor Trump)?
DG wants to imply that black-and-white thinking resulting in binary opinions are mentally ill or bad in some way. Psychology doesn't forbid two-sides to an issue. It encourages contextual and more nuanced thinking. But where is the evidence that nuance didn't contribute to forming a dichotomous view? Right, there is none.
Actually, DG is merely attacking the views he dislikes and trying to defend Somerby from those who disagree with him (who automatically become the other side to a duality of pro- and con- thinking on Somerby's issue. DG is not owning his defense, just trying portray others as bad.
Nice try, DG, but you are still a Somerby-supporting troll who is behaving like an asshole.
What's not to like about Walz? He is inoffensive.
DeleteWhen in doubt, start up with the name-calling!
DeleteDG, you purposefully present yourself as a right wing asshole, so don't act all butt hurt when you are called out.
DeleteAside from conflating name-calling with merely descriptive language, you completely ignored 1:58's points.
Y'all cut DG some slack, he is smart enough to see the nuances in issues like slavery and genocides (not all Blacks are good, not all Jews are good). Y'all are just jealous of DG's powerful insights and his unabashed expressions of them.
DeleteAnonymouse 10:29am, I was unenthusiastic about Vance due to his whine-and-dine book and said so several times. Vance has shown himself to be sharper than I had reckoned, but that change of mind happened not long ago. I have never had the impression that this place is a Democratic blog rather than a blog written by a brilliant liberal man. Not everyone is the operative that you think they should be.
Delete2:12 - Yes, I not only ignored, but I never read 1:58’s “points.” And I still haven’t. Experience has taught me that virtually any comment beyond 10 lines can safely be ignored.
DeleteAnd if it makes you feel better to think of me, falsely, as right-wing, then please go and softly sing yourself to sleep.
DG, your delusions of grandeur aside, you are fairly open with your right wing traits, so your denial rings hollow.
DeleteVance is our least popular VP ever, so he needs to get a lot "sharper" if he wants his ambitions to come to fruition.
It is noteworthy how Trump has been backed by old school right wingers who want to dominate the world by hoarding assets, whereas Vance/Musk/Thiel want an isolated private island (Greenland for ex) edgelord post democracy White supremacy nonsense, nonsense which Somerby seems to have an affinity for. It'll be interesting to see how these different views conflict.
“Vance is our least popular VP ever, so he needs to get a lot "sharper" if he wants his ambitions to come to fruition.”
DeleteAgreed. What Republican morphs into a Democrat by venturing that about Vance? None. Your unreasonable and boneheaded blogboard tactics are solely reserved for your religious heretics.
DG is correct.
DeleteJust because Somerby repeats Right-wing grievances on a daily basis, doesn't mean he's a bigot like each and every Republican voter. Bob's occasional mild critiques of Fox News is the tell.
It was a right wing grievance when Ketanji Brown Jackson was nominated to the Supreme Court. The right openly labeled her a DEI nomination and insisted she was underqualified (despite her impressive achievements). Somerby was there with them, arguing that if she wasn't the absolute most qualified person in the country, then some white guy should have been nominated instead. Never mind that diversity brings experience that white guys lack and makes a more balanced court. Somerby repeated all of the bigoted right wing remarks criticizing her imaginary lack of qualifications. I think that makes Somerby a bigot exactly like those Republican voters and Fox News and their various hosts and whiners. How would any mild critique of Fox offset this kind of bigotry (which Somerby no doubt regards as just logical thinking)?
Deleteanon 9:50, presumably most if not all the comments above - so stupid that I feel a little soiled even responding - as you constantly do, you distort what TDH said about Jackson. there were claims that she was the most qualified person ever appointed to the Supreme Court. TDH expressed skepticism that of all the Supreme Court Justices, she was the most qualified ever. There's no objective standard as to who the most qualified Supreme Court justice is or was, who was the best President, what's the best movie etc. TDH never said Jackson was not qualified, and he never said a "white" person should have been nominated in her place. What drives you - certainly not having the minutest respect for the truth or reason.
Delete"We can't necessarily say that every word is 100 percent completely and totally right."
ReplyDeleteThis is an unreasonable standard and there is no reason to even state this, unless Somerby wishes to undermine what he has just quoted. Disavow what he has just said. This is one of the obvious ways in which Somerby tries to have things both ways (or all ways) at once. He backs away from saying whatever he has just said.
Why say anything, if Somerby is going to take it back with the next breath?
"Why say anything, if Somerby is going to take it back with the next breath?"
DeleteBecause, rather obviously, his qualifier concerned a Wikipedia entry he was quoting from, not something he himself was saying.
Read much?
He does this about everything he writes.
Delete10:40 is correct, Somerby has no knowledge to endorse or refute anything in what he quoted, so the weird no shit Sherlock qualifier from Somerby does imply some disagreement, although left to the reader's supposition.
DeleteSomerby's anything is possible philosophy is known in sociology/ethics to be correlated with authoritarianism, see McNeil's/Potter's boxes.
The name for this philosophical view is nihilism. It denies the existence of knowledge, expertise or wisdom. If he actually adhered to that view (as opposed to using it for his own purposes), he wouldn't be writing a blog.
DeleteI don’t know - Somerby has told us pretty explicitly that Fox is a clown-show corporate propaganda outlet. I don’t see equivocation there. (And the fact that he notes that on occasion Fox gets things right - e.g., Biden lost his fastball - is not “equivocation.”)
DeleteNihilism is related but is more of a pop culture notion, arising from pondering the nature of humans based merely on logic and reasoning. The sociology/ethics mentioned comes more from a science based methodology, although there have been many advancements since those "boxes".
DeleteAgree, Somerby's posts are not genuine, he is pushing an agenda.
"This is an unreasonable standard and there is no reason to even state this, unless Somerby wishes to..."
Delete...post it on the Internet where Nonny Mice predictably pop up to nitpick every statement and guess at the poster's secret motives.
“Agree, Somerby's posts are not genuine, he is pushing an agenda.”
DeleteYou got that right. There’s a show going on, but it’s not Bob’s.
Bob Somerby is the go to blogger, if you want to read the Right-wing grievance of the day.
DeleteOTOH, if you're looking for a blog that muses on the media, you are shit out of luck.
Yeah, it’s not Bob’s show, Cecelia. It’s yours and dic’s.
DeleteQuaker, there’s a lot to criticize. One person’t nit is something someone else cares about. We can’t all be you.
Delete"The manosphere is running wild, as this new guest essay in the New York Times posits. The essay will appear in print in Sunday's editions."
ReplyDeleteSomerby provides a link, but unless you subscribe to the NY Times, you cannot even see the name of the guest editorialist. If Somerby is going to discuss something that others cannot access, he should quote the relevant part, out of courtesy to his own readers.
It’s not surprising that Joe Rogan gave a sympathetic interview to crackpot Hotep Jesus. Rogan’s style is to make every guest look good. So it was telling that Kamala declined Rogan’s invitation. He would have helped her come across well,
ReplyDeleteRogan's willingness to promote someone like Hotep Jesus doesn't suggest he would have promoted Harris. The legitimacy of Harris's own views and accomplishments (even when not compared to crackpots) means that they stand on their own without being pushed by Rogan to an audience apparently fascinated by weirdness and conspiracy theories, much less white supremacy and domination of women.
DeleteThere is an element of male domination involved in suggesting that an accomplished woman like Harris needs Rogan's endorsement to be successful. Rogan is beneath her and she would be lowering herself to fawn all over him, as she might be expected to do by visiting his show. She doesn't need him and there is no expectation of good will coming from that direction.
The election demonstrated that Harris needed Rogan’s endorsement.
DeleteIt is not surprising that DiC is a fan of Joe Rogan, who recently hosted a literal nazi symp.
DeleteRogan’s guest list reads like a who’s-who of America’s elite: Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, Mark Zuckerberg, and a rotating cast of Republican figures like Donald Trump and JD Vance. Critics have long noted his tendency to lob softball questions at these “robber barons,” letting them spin unchallenged narratives about deregulation, tax cuts, and their own benevolence. But the shift from coddling the ultra-rich to platforming Cooper — a man who has praised Nazi rule over drag queens and blamed Winston Churchill for World War II’s horrors — crosses a line from bias to recklessness.
Cooper’s appearance on Rogan’s show this month wasn’t his first brush with infamy. In September 2024, he stunned listeners on Tucker Carlson’s podcast by calling Churchill the “chief villain” of WWII, downplaying Hitler’s role as the architect of genocide. “They went in with no plan,” Cooper said of the Nazis’ handling of millions of prisoners, as if Auschwitz were an impromptu oversight rather than a deliberate extermination machine. On Rogan’s show, he doubled down, claiming Hitler didn’t openly call for Jewish annihilation — a lie debunked by Hitler’s own 1939 Reichstag speech vowing to “annihilate the Jewish race.” Cooper even painted Hitler as a misunderstood patriot who “loved the German people,” conveniently ignoring the millions of German Jews and others he slaughtered.
Rogan, for his part, sat idly by. No pushback, no incredulity — just the blank stare of a host either unwilling or unable to confront the poison seeping into his platform. This isn’t mere oversight; it’s complicity. Cooper’s views were no secret. Before his Rogan booking, he tweeted that Nazi-occupied France was “infinitely preferable” to drag queens dancing at the Olympics — a statement so brazen it defies euphemism. He’s not a contrarian historian; he’s a Nazi apologist. And yet, Rogan gave him a three-hour spotlight.
No, David, the election demonstrated that Harris needed more voters choosing her to be president.
DeleteDiC is a complete liar.
DeleteHarris reached out to be a guest on Rogan, but Rogan refused to accommodate Harris' schedule, per Trump's request.
Rogan played no role in the election.
Somerby also pushes similar misinformation calling Rogan the "most-watched podcast" but this is false, as Rogan has been surpassed by Meidas Touch, a liberal/progressive podcast that supports Dems.
I heard that Comma La didn’t do Rogan’s show because the team was afraid she’d receive liberal backlash.
Delete
DeleteComma La could only be interviewed by fake news media, like CBS.
Otherwise the actual interview would be published or broadcast, and everyone would see her word-salads.
I feel backlash against Newsom after his remarks to Bill Maher.
Delete"Rogan is beneath Harris."
DeleteHarris was a mess.
Nope, Harris wanted to be on Rogan's show, but Rogan claimed he could not accommodate her schedule, with insiders saying Trump told Rogan to refuse Harris. So it was Rogan that turned down Harris.
DeleteJoe Rogan's fans confuse the fact that he's too stupid to know when he's being lied to, with being "open-minded".
Delete3:05’s claim is kind of important. If true, it certainly casts the whole “she refused to appear with Rogan” in a different light.
Delete@3:05's comment is not true. Rogan offered Harris the same way he offers interviews to everyone: Three hour session, in his studio, broadcast the uncensored session. Harris was in Texas at one point and could have conveniently come to Rogan's studio. And, as VP she has access to Air Force 2.
DeleteHarris demanded more and more special conditions -- conditions that no other interviewee ever got. Rogan eventually refused to accede to all the special handling that she demanded.
"But we finally watched Eyes Wide Shut again last Saturday night. There was the longing for sexual subjugation all over again, laid out for all to ponder back in 1999"
ReplyDeleteEyes Wide Shut is fiction, a movie that exploits sexual deviance to gain a wider audience. It features Cruise and Kidman before their breakup, when she was still part of Scientology, which has a coercive element to it. Kidman said she has never watched the film all the way through, just snippets of it, although she feels the film was based on their own marriage.
Somerby's belief in a desire for sexual subjugation is self-serving on the part of Kubrick and men who have a corresponding desire to subjugate women. It is difficult to separate sexual subjugation from cultural subjugation of women. Accepting such subjugation as an inherent part of male/female sexual interaction and generalizing it beyond specific couples both strike me as convenient for those men who wish to return to the bad old days when women had no rights at all, not in the bedroom, in the workplace, in their own homes, financially, in raising their own children, in artistic expression, and in any activity.
Somerby fascination with this one movie about sexual deviance is telling, just as his gushing remarks about 13 year old girls (most recently that kid being used for political purposes in Maine) reveal unfortunate aspects of his psyche. Eyes Wide Shut is just a film, not sexology and not sociology. It is a self-indulgent movie about Cruise and Kidman that titillates sexual curiosity. There is no evidence it reflects widespread human behavior. But Somerby is obsessed with it. Why? He will no doubt be unwilling to explore his own attraction to the film, since he is unable to make the simplest direct statements about any of his views. But he foists that regressive crap on his readers often enough to tell us quite clearly that something about it grabs his attention and won't let go.
"his gushing remarks about 13 year old girls"
Delete1. What does a men-in-women's-sports-story have to do with sexual subjugation?
2. Why use the word 'gush' when Somerby simply called her impressive and composed?
Wait til he finds out about Kidman's new hit release Baby Girl.
DeleteAnonymouse 11:30am, the essay from the anonymouse at 10:59am came from a file labeled “Kubrick” and was written months ago for just this purpose. Bob has referenced Eyes Wide Shut many times over the years. She prepared this awhile ago and tweaked it for today.
DeleteCorby has mental problems. It's sad.
Delete"Why use the word 'gush' when Somerby simply called her impressive and composed?"
DeleteSomerby has a pattern of admiring and praising 12-14 year old girls, but not using the same positive adjectives with others in similar situations. Why is praising this girl for composure relevant to anything being discussed? It isn't. It is as out-of-place as when Somerby said Anne Frank's cover photo was worth the price of the book. This odd praise sticks out like a sore thumb in Somerby's essays and is consistent over the years, from Malala to this unfortunate teen, forced by conservative parents to make a martyr of their child via publicity of a political issue.
Why praise the composure of a girl when there is nothing traumatizing going on and her situation is nothing upsetting. I recall when a flasher hung out around my own middle school. The girls were not traumatized or upset, nor did they show "composure". They mocked him and no one reported him to authorities until a girl's mother overheard her talking about the situation. That is the more likely response of teen girls, because they are not the delicate flowers that conservatives wish to portray them as. That's part of why this who trans dressing room complaint or the bathroom invasion scenario that Boebert complains about are total non-issues to those experiencing them.
Men don't want women or girls looking at other men's genitals. It is a guy thing, perhaps arising from our evolution from great apes. Men use their genitals to subordinate women and to express dominance over other apes. Of course they don't want random guys doing that to their own chicks.
DeleteDemocrat parents are the only parents who want their 13 year old daughters to be forced to see men's genitals.
DeleteSomerby does tend to gush over teen girls.
DeleteGush definition: "speak or write with effusiveness or exaggerated enthusiasm"
That is what he did with this Maine girl, and that is why the word "gush" is used.
I’m an ape.
DeleteConservatives want to impose their parenting views on everyone else. There are families where fathers and very young daughters shower or bathe as a family, where casual nudity while undressing or dressing is routine and not scandalous. There are families that expose their children to art in museums, books or sculture that include male genitalia, not just female nudity. Some kids get to go to Italy where such explicit art is inescapable unless you keep your eyes wide shut all the time. There are rural kids who learn about animal genitalia as a routine part of life and don't imagine men are like neutered Ken dolls. There are kids who have doctors as parents, who believe in teaching about the human body from early childhood. And there are nudists who consider the body to be normal, even beautiful in both sexes, and not a source of threat or shame.
DeleteConservatives who want to preserve all sexual knowledge until the marriage night are a minority in our culture. Such extreme prudishness ignores popular culture, the easy access to porn, presence of multiculturalism and different family practices, experiences of male and female siblings as children, and pretend that it is traumatic to see something unexpected, when there is no psychological evidence that is true. The desire of conservatives to impose their views on everyone else is the problem in Maine, not anything transpeople are doing.
It would ber so simple for the parents of that teen girl to insist that she dress in a bathroom, instead of telling transkids that they cannot engage in gym, and the excuse that she would be late is bogus. Bathrooms are adjacent to dressing rooms, not in another county, as Somerby pretends with his essay on the size of Maine's population. Boys in gym terrorize each other with their genitals routinely and no one protects them.
So-called flashing is illegal because flashers and peepers progress to violent sex crimes, not because there is inherent harm if someone sees another person's genitals unexpectedly or inappropriately.
DeleteBabysitters see the genitals of babies and toddlers routinely while doing their jobs. It is common for girls age 12+ to babysit both their own siblings and other people's kids (for money), including male and female children. Are they scarred for life by that experience? Get real!
Trans kids who take puberty blockers do not develop humongous male penises and balls. Some may have birth defects causing their genitals to be either nonexistent or small or displaced. What then would a 13 year old see? And why would a transgirl be taking off underpants when changing to gym shorts? That is not at all common.
So this really seems more and more like a manufactured concern being used to persecute transpeople, not a genuine problem. That a 13 year old girl would be forced by political adults to make a false complaint strikes me as abuse of the 13 year old, regardless of her supposed "composure." Teaching teens to lie strikes me as a bad idea, in general.
Republicans are obsessed with how their males suffer from undersized penises, and this connects with their obsession of conflating nudity/gender/orientation with sex acts, and their obsession with sexualizing girls.
DeleteTrump raping that 13yo is not too dissimilar from how Republicans and Somerby use girls as weapons in their demented cultural wars.
Anonymouse 2:19pm, no, it really seems like you’re doing headstands in trying to turn a convention into something that is “manufactured” political device. Btw- if you are successful in doing that you will manage to turn feminism on its head.
DeleteAnonymices are claiming that Bob gushes over adolescent girls in a way he doesn’t gush over women. As though this would mean that he has the hots for them in the way he doesn’t have for mature women. They find it suspicious that Bob is critical of adult women when he thinks they’re not doing their jobs, but doesn’t treat adolescent girls who have come to public attention in the same manner. Go figure. Their other compelling evidence for Bob being a dirty old man is that he isn’t making a thing over adolescent boys who distinguish themselves. These are the same anonymices that will launch into screeds, odes, rants, and pity parties as to the plight of women, replete with references to suffering family members and peers..They will argue that boys and men are routinely elevated over their xx chromosome peers. However, when *Bob does “what a girl!” It’s due to him being something that you wouldn’t call your worst enemy based upon such a ridiculous premise. This is who these militants clowns are.
DeleteExactly, I mean Hitler did make the trains run on time, the praise is apt.
DeleteObserving Republicans squeal at being called out on their sexism and weird interest in underage girls is kind of amusing until you consider all the harm it has done.
And when they are done squealing, Republicans shrug their shoulders and laugh it off.
Anonymouse flying monkey 3:10pm, Bob is a Republican like you’re a mensch.
DeleteBob is a right winger.
DeleteMaybe if you weren't a man pretending to be a woman, you'd be taken seriously, but I doubt it, since your comments are just empty barbs.
Anonymouse 3:16pm, maybe if you had a nym rather than being anonymous you’d be embarrassed to invariably resort to your tripe.
Delete@3:10 That was Mussolini, but let it go. You're rolling.
DeleteI have the hots for Cecelia.
DeleteSomerby has been confused about "Eyes Wide Shut" for years.
DeleteHaving a nym apparently does not prevent the commenter from typing embarrassing tripe. Witness Cecelia.
DeleteCecelia, you are embarrassing Somerby with your attempted defense of him.
DeleteSomerby never talks about teen boys.
DeleteAnonymouse 6:30pm, your level of faith in your own posts is exhibited by your anonymity.
DeleteAnd your level of faith in your comments is misplaced, Cecelia, if you claim that having a nym shows “faith” in one’s comments.
DeleteAnonymouse 6:50pm, so a guy applauding the talent and character of girls of achievement is not championing females, it suddenly turns into something awful when you don’t like him.
DeleteAnonymouse 6:53pm, it shows the bare minimum of faith. That’s the point.
DeleteSomerby doesn't applaud the talent and character of girls or boys. He fixates on a specific girl, overpraises her in an over-the-top way to the point that one could suspect him of being sarcastic, except he doesn't signal that as his intent. To our ears, it sounds slimy and inappropriate. It was especially creepy when he extolled the beauty of the martyred Anne Frank, calling her cover photo "worth the price of the book." A remark like that makes one wonder what he will do with the photo.
DeleteHe went on about Malala for days. He has never done that over any young man of similar age. He might have talked about the courage of David Hogg, a survivor of the Parkland HS shooting who now spearheads a national campaign to limit such shootings. Somerby never mentioned his courage while being shouted at by Marjorie Taylor Greene, who was literally right in his teenaged face! Crickets from Somerby about that incident. Wrong gender and age, I suppose.
Somerby has never championed females in this blog. Ever. He complains about young women while mooning over young girls. Here is his quoted statement about a new bio of Anne Frank with her picture on the cover. There are no pictures of Frank during her time in hiding, given the circumstances of her life and death, so this not a new photo:
"We can't recommend Prose's book [ Anne Frank: The Book, the Life, the Afterlife, 2009] strongly enough. For us, it came as a revelation, in several different ways.
Our view? Its beautiful cover, a tribute to life, pays the price of admission alone."
Somerby says this, knowing that the central fact of Frank's life is that she died in a concentration camp shortly before the allies liberated such camps. Her death was a waste and her life was stunted. Yes, she wrote a diary that was later found and published. She didn't publish her work, her father did. On what basis is she an inspiration to a guy like Somerby when her main achievement was to suffer?
From Somerby on September 24, 2022:
Delete"For that reason, Anne Frank—a brilliant child who would later be regarded as a sacred figure around the world—died in Bergen-Belsen at the age of 15 years, along with her older sister, Margot Frank."
She was not brilliant but a normal girl who lived in hiding and kept a diary in which she recorded the usual events of any young teen's life. Her writing was edited before publication so who knows how talented she may have been as a writer. She died before achieving anything, but her death was used by many people thereafter to make their own points about the holocaust. Somerby swoons over the use of her death as a symbol during Mandela's incarceration and occurred with other political events. That use of her memory doesn't make her sacred, as Somerby calls her.
Somerby's over-praise of her undercuts the very real tragedy of her death, because she was like the many other innocents who were put to death by the Nazis. She didn't need to be larger than life to be worth grieving and remembering.
Anonymouse 9:27pm, the only thing worse than tarnishing Somerby’s character in the worst possible way based on what you've stated here is implying that a girl who had to conceal herself in an attic in such a period of history and who expressed her daily struggles along with all the hopes and dreams of girlhood is only significant because of her suffering. You are a vacuous idiot and a contemptible one at that. There are no political positions you can hold as to anything on the planet that can redeem you from being that. The only thing we can hope is that time will make some sort of difference.
DeleteWhat else makes her significant? Name one thing.
DeleteNote that she didn't conceal herself. She and her family were concealed by their neighbors, who took a huge risk in doing so. They were heroes even if no one knows their names today (without reading some history).
I've read Anne Frank's diary. I'll bet you haven't.
All girls have hopes and dreams and daily struggles. The books written by some of those girls in the US are being suppressed (banned) by schools because they are members of stigmatized groups, such as being gay or bisexual or trans or poor or black or disabled or immigrant. They are being persecuted in much the same way that Anne Frank and her family were before they went into hiding. You are a vacuous contemptible idiot for not seeing that parallel. These kids share hopes and dreams too. Let's hope that DOGE doesn't declare them waste and try to send them to El Salvador. Anne Frank was treated like trash by the Nazis. Our govt is doing the same to people even as you drink your beer (or gin) and write troll comments here. You don't have a high horse, Cecelia. You are on the wrong side of this issue.
So is Somerby.
DeleteI’m not on a high horse, it’s that you’re on a grubby miniature one-trick pony.
Delete@10:26 says "You don't have a high horse, Cecelia.
DeleteCecelia says "I'm not on a high horse,"
Finally, a point of agreement!
So, to summarize 10:26’s “point”: Although Anne Frank was an unexceptional girl, Somerby nevertheless says her picture on the cover of a book was beautiful, which somehow (?) proves Somerby lusts after young girls. My God, what a panty-sniffing crackpot!
DeleteDG, there is a pattern of Somerby swooning like this over girls ages 12-14, except when they accuse Roy Moore. There is also a pattern of Somerby disliking and attacking grown women, especially youngish female journalists, but including Kamala Harris, Rachel Maddow, Chanel Miller and any woman accusing a man of sexual impropriety (see what he has said about Stormy Daniels), and any black woman. He has said nice things about Roseanne Barr (who is a conservative conspiracy theory nut) but almost no one else female.
DeleteEveryone knows that you analyze patterns in data, not individual data points (as you are doing here). Look at the pattern in Somerby's writing since 2000. What clinched it for me was the essay he wrote about encountering two of his female middle school students at a city intersection, ages 14 or so, and gushed about their bravery and the difficulty of their lives and their capability and their innocence and sweetness and courage. Much like the way he talks about Malala and Anne Frank. It was embarrassing but because these were his former students, it made me wonder if he was like that in his classes and why he left teaching immediately after working with that older age group in middle school instead of elementary school (as previously in his 10-12 year career).
There are many alternative explanations. It was the time the draft ended so he no longer needed his teaching position for deferment. It was also around the time of a scandal involving altering test scores that was in the news. He wrote essays and appeared on TV to talk about it, so perhaps he got disillusioned or burned some bridges. But he also wrote about the intransigence of black test scores and wondered why no matter what happened, those scores never closed the gap (although they did obviously go up by the same amount as white scores). He has since argued that black kids can't learn and when encouraging progress is made, it is probably the schools lying about their accomplishments, since miracles don't happen. His attacks on MS reading score improvements are consistent with that attitude. I figure he got tired of being an ineffective teacher in a classroom where his efforts didn't produce much improvement either. Grandiose fantasies about their own effectiveness are not uncommon in men at work and Teach for America may have created some unrealistic expectations about the value of enthusiasm as opposed to teaching skill. So he may have blamed the kids and stormed off to do standup comedy.
Somerby tries hard not to express direct opinions, but he does reveal a lot about himself, especially if you've been reading him for 25 years.
Here is how Somerby gushes about Malala:
"Who is Malala Yousafzai? She has always struck as an other-worldly figure, of a type one rarely encounters. Is this how Jesus seemed to the elders when he spoke in the temple?
It may be that Malala Yousafzai will simply turn out to have a 300 IQ. But whoever or whatever she is, we’re fairly sure she isn’t what Arana seemed to dub her at the end of her book review, which took a somewhat pedestrian approach to a very unusual figure..."
He refuses to call her a child or a girl (she is 15). He goes on for days about her spiritual excellence, using her to batter Rachel Maddow for lacking "satya." He attributes the grace of Jesus to a child. It is embarrassing (for Somerby) to watch him gush while he rejects adult women and their causes.
Somerby is clueless about his own psyche. Psychologists call this "lacking insight." No one has accused him of molesting anyone, but his romanticization of these young girls while simultaneously failing to accept adult women as legitimate people, is striking in its bald expression and consistency over the years. He sees these young teens as pure and wonderful and their older sisters as tarnished, spoiled, impure (in the madonna/whore sense his Catholic church taught, except he sees no madonna, only women who fail.
You don't see anything you don't want to see, DG. You may be Somerby, for all I know. But accusing me in particular of making this up when it is obvious, is your failure to recognize what is wrong with your hero. Just as so many on the right can't see anything wrong with Trump or Musk or the many other kooks and oddballs on the right. Denial is the name of that game, both the psychological kind and the explicit lies told in defense of these right wing miscreants and criminals.
DeleteWhat is your explanation for Somerby's defense of Roy Moore and Brock Turner? Besides calling the people who objected to it a bunch of names?
The quotes above are from October 14, 2013. Read the comments. They show how far this blog has fallen given what the comments are like here now.
Again, if you can’t say it in 10 lines or less, I’m not reading it. Experience tells me that almost every comment beyond 10 lines is not worth the time to read.
DeleteBut I will say that you’ve brought up the photo of Anne Frank maybe 25 times or so, and your obsession seems to be a tad suggestive. Are you projecting?
DeleteThe comments below 10 lines aren't worth reading either. That means it is OK for you to just fuck off.
DeleteDG doesn't grasp the concept that comments are reactive to the blogger.
DeleteDG answered @10:26, who wrote way more than 10 lines, but when someone replied with quotes of Somerby, DG says he won't read it, which lets him off the hook (he thinks). That makes DG a pretty dishonest guy, but what else is new?
DeleteQuantifiers are important. One should distinguish between “some” and “all”
ReplyDeleteThe author of that NYT article wrote “Feminism has gone too far, men are losing out on jobs to women and women prefer to stay at home rather than work.” By omitting the word “some”, she makes reasonable statements sound unreasonable and sexist, I suspect that the statements she deplores really amount to, “SOME ASPECTS OF Feminism have gone too far, men are losing out on SOME jobs to women and SOME women prefer to stay at home rather than work.”
I agree that quantifiers are useful, but when someone is obviously generalizing, it isn't correct to object if they don't say Man A holds this opinion, Man B holds a different opinion, Man C holds a different opinion, but summarizing the more widely held opinion of a group in order to discuss that point of view. In that case, too many quantifiers get in the way of communication. Did this author never acknowledge that she was generalizing? One disclaimer should be enough. It seems obvious that the women who prefer to stay at home are not the ones beating men out for jobs.
DeleteI find it more problematic to refer to feminism, which is a political theory and then describe sociological realities about work and relationships as if the two were identical. There is no evidence that feminism, rather than economic necessity, drove women into jobs and out of the home, when inability of men to find jobs that support home ownership and a higher standard of living may have been the reason why more wives work.
There is also a point where bashing feminism is a way of asserting dominance over women, not any kind of philosophical or theoretical pushback about ideas about women's place in our society.
It is hard to assess feminism without recognizing that it is now a conservative shibboleth to oppose it and white supremacist views on women are also political. Having a female author on such an essay seems propagandistic and I wonder whether this is a right-wing attack on civil rights for women, but there is no way for me to judge since I cannot read the essay myself. By omitting any quotes Somerby and David are both free to characterize it however they want, for their own purposes.
There is research on this topic. "Claudia Goldin won the 2023 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences for her research on women's labor market outcomes, particularly her comprehensive account of women's earnings and participation in the workforce throughout history, including the causes of change and the sources of the remaining gender gap." Did she write the op-ed? David still doesn't tell us the author's name.
David in Cal,
DeleteYou're only one Republican voter who isn't a bigot, from being able to say, "not all Republican voters are bigots", without being corrected.
@1:10 the author is Rachel Louise Snyder. At some points she sort of indicates that she was not talking about all men. E.g. "young men increasingly lean conservative ." In others spots, she combines generalizing with acknowledging that that she's not talking about all young men. E.g. " it plays into young men’s insecurities around their bodies — many of the accounts glorify fitness — as well as their future success and their relationships. Young men might believe that in order to be successful, they can’t show vulnerability;"
DeleteSo she did qualify her statements but you initially left that part out.
DeleteShe appears to be a professor of literature and journalist, most recently writing about domestic violence. She is not a professional feminist, economist, sociologist, expert in women's studies or historian who might know about feminism, women's rights, and workplace issues.
DeleteI don't know that any female intellectuals these days are ignoring the manosphere (it is where incels come from). I hope she talked about the connection between domestic violence and mass shooters. It will be interesting to read whatever excerpts Somerby gets around to quoting.
Women outperform men in education. Men commit more crimes and are victims of more crimes.
ReplyDeleteMen are a disadvantaged group.
College attendance isn't education. Where have you been?
DeleteLike so many men, I’m incarcerated.
DeleteMen invented and are the main participants in the justice system, in all of the roles. How is that women's fault or men's disadvantage?
DeleteWhite men in America are suffering from an epidemic of suicide.
DeleteWhy are you so sad, White men?
Partly because they are the main users of street drugs including those with fentanyl (explicitly or hidden). That leads to overdoses that constitute suicides of despair.
DeleteAfter leaving office, the Clintons spearheaded an effort to place narcan in schools and public places so that drug overdoses could be treated quickly enough to revive non-breathing drug users. That (and similar efforts regarding access to narcan) has made a huge difference in the number of deaths from opiate overdose.
I find it very difficult to understand how Trump, our president and a person who is presumably aware of the magnitude and intransigence of drug abuse, who blames gangs and wants to prevent fentanyl from entering our country, would encourage a man like Musk, who is a blatant and obvious ketamine abuser. Ketamine is a Schedule 3 controlled substance used in veterinary medicine and not any kind of harmless recreational drug, yet Musk parades around doing bizarre things at Mar a Lago while under the influence, behaving strangely at Trump rallies, as if his behavior were harmless or normal when it sets a horrible example to young people and everyone else in our nation.
Musk needs to resign immediately and be removed from the public eye while he goes to rehab, the way any other person would be expected to do. Meanwhile, the hypocrisy undermines every word Trump has ever spoken about removing drugs and gangs from our country.
The right seems to think this stuff is funny. It really isn't.
DeleteTrump's an Adderall addict. I wouldn't be surprised if that is why he's pro drug abuse.
DeleteWomen and people of color have taken over. White men are marginalized.
DeleteTrump's govt has taken over. How many women and people of color are on DOGE? How many are in Trump's cabinet? People like Pete Hegseth should be marginalized, but he isn't.
DeleteDOGE and Trump are the last gasps of dead-enders.
Delete9:56: How can we be sure that Hotep Jesus isn't really Andy Kaufmann though?
DeleteMusk: "For example, like the simple survey that was literally a 10-question survey that you could do with Survey Monkey that costs you about $10,000, the government was being charged almost $1 billion for that."
ReplyDeleteBret Baier, (supine) Fox News host: "For just a survey?"
Musk: "A billion dollars for a simple, online survey: 'Do you like the National Park?'"
However, the DOGE database lists only $144 million in Department of Interior savings, with only $400,000 of that related to surveys.
Following extensive criticism of Musk's falsehood, this morning on the DOGE Wall of Receipts the item appears to show with savings of $0.
Well written, Hector. Musk deserves criticism. He's been careless and over-optimistic and flat-out wrong on some cost saving estimates.
DeleteIn Musk's recent interview with Bret Baier, Musk made another estimate that sounds overly optimistic. He claimed he would reduce spending by one trillion dollars a year. I doubt it. Still, if he only saved half a trillion or 1/3 of a trillion that would be a heck of an achievement.
How big a difference is there between 0 and 1/3 of a trillion dollars? The point is that he is not saving what he claims. This is not a quibble about how much he saved when there is no evidence he saved even $1 on that survey. But the larger point is that Musk is a big fat liar.
Delete"if he only saved half a trillion or 1/3 of a trillion that would be a heck of an achievment."
DeleteAs of this morning the 'Wall of Receipts' shows $130 billion, which we can assume is a considerably inflated figure, so it seems DOGE will fall well short of your standard.
And as a reminder, any DOGE savings will be overwhelmed by the expected tax cut extension.
Trump and Musk have saved $400 million, and we know this for a fact.
DeleteMusk suggested the Trump admin purchase $400 million dollars worth of Cybertrucks, but after getting bad press for conflicts of interest and corruption as well as the horrible quality of Cybertrucks (they are literally falling apart as people drive them), Trump reversed course and cut the funding.
Otherwise, Trump's per day federal spending has increased over Biden's, Musk has yet to "save" an actual penny.
I would like to see Trump's use of his govt-issued jet for personal use stop. Playing golf is not a part of Trump's job.
DeleteHector — I agree with you but have a different spin. The loss of revenue from Trump’s tax cuts makes it all the more urgent to get the Musk spending cuts to offset the revenue loss.
DeleteThere is no good reason to cut taxes for the wealthy while hurting the majority of citizens in various ways including cutting important functions such as education of disabled students, access to national parks, development of health and disease prevention measures, social security. This is not what voters approved and is being done without congressional involvement, and is thus against the will of the people.
DeleteOf course it's what the votes approved. Trump could not have been more clear that he intended to renew the tax cut and to reduce government spending.
DeleteThe tax cut renewal WILL be done with Congressional involvement. The President does not have the power to unilaterally change the tax. Congress will have to pass a law putting the new rates in effect.
But more people voted for someone other than Trump, who only got 30% of the electorate.
DeleteBiden had way more of a mandate than Trump, yet David only had hate for Biden, none of this "well the voters have spoken" nonsense.
Typical of Republicans, lacking integrity is a feature, not a bug.
Yes, those who want to discuss cutting the deficit but fastidiously avoid talking about the revenue side, do not deserve to be taken seriously.
DeleteThe tax cut along with impending inflation will overwhelm the unimpressive Doge benefits, firmly cementing Trump’s legacy of having added more to the deficit than any other president. By a long shot.
Delete"But more people voted for someone other than Trump, who only got 30% of the electorate."
DeleteOnly if you count not voting as voting.
Think before you post.
5:23: Trump got less than 50% of the votes cast. Put that one through your logic processor.
DeleteSome day, we'll look back, and realize Trump not taking guns away from citizens, before he guts Social Security, was his fatal mistake.
Delete'Musk is a big fat liar.'
DeleteIndeed. The Baier interview was set up in an apparent attempt for Musk/DOGE to rehab their image.
But even in this setting, Musk couldn't stop from inventing stories about a billion dollar ten-question survey. His messiah complex is too strong for him to control it.
Hector, are we sure though that Hotep Jesus isn't really Andy Kaufmann?
Delete“It has become clear that truth and transparency are not desired by the Secretary, but rather he wishes subservient confirmation of his misinformation and lies,” he [Dr. Peter Marks, who played a key role in the first Trump administration’s Operation Warp Speed to develop Covid-19 vaccines] wrote in a resignation letter referring to HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
ReplyDeleteHe did not merely play a "key role", Marks came up with idea, and it was implemented by Marks and the FDA with funding from Congress; Trump nor his admin had anything to do with it, even though Trump takes credit for it.
DeleteTrump has now cut funding for mRNA research, which was making significant advancements in finding a cure for cancer.
Trump properly takes credit for speeding the testing and approval process of new mRNA vaccines.
DeleteTrump had nothing to do with any of that, so Trump is disingenuously taking credit for other people's work, per usual.
DeleteIrrespective of operation warp speed, Pfizer’s vaccine came out simultaneously with the warp speed funded version and involved no US money, so the idea that warp speed hastened the availability of an effective vaccine is not true.
DeleteHey DiC - how is that Ukraine energy infrastructure cease fire you were bragging the felon negotiated working out? Looks like it lasted longer than the first cease fire, this one about 30 minutes. When do you come to the realization the felon is a lying no nothing who has surrounded himself with numskulls?
DeleteArty— the cease fire that Trump tried to negotiate would have saved many thousands of lives. You take joy in an event that will mean the death of many thousands of young men, simply because Trump didn’t get credit for an achievement. Are you really that callous?
DeleteMaybe King Orange Chickenshit should get his fat ass off of the golf course and stop worrying about punishing people who were just doing their jobs and stop extorting major law firms he might have had a little more success, but the Russians are laughing at the stupid jackass.
DeleteIf Trump wants to take credit for his government helping to develop the vaccine, I’m trying to figure out why he now wants to slash HHS, CDC, and NIH. To ensure that the development of vaccines no longer gets government help? Because Operation Warp Speed was really just waste, fraud, and abuse? Because the government has no business promoting the development of things the private sector can do?
DeleteDavid in Cal,
DeleteIf Trump cared at all about saving lives, he wouldn't have hired RFK, Junior to "Make Polio Great Again".
“ Are you really that callous?”
DeleteDiC, you’re in full troll mode here. You keep posting praise of Trump and his ability to produce a cease fire in Ukraine, when he hasn’t achieved that. He is negotiating in bad faith, expecting zelensky to essentially capitulate, while Putin gets what he wants. Also, Trump is being played by Putin, who has no real intention of a cease fire, or offering any concessions, and agrees to some “cease fire” and immediately bombs Ukraine.
It is you who center the issue around trump.
David in Cal,
DeleteEveryone knows January 6th is the day Republican voters tried to overthrow the United States Capitol just because black people's votes were counted in the 2020 Presidential election.
I'm looking to find out the date Republican voters, who are economically anxious, and not at all just a shit pile of bigots (hat tip, liberal media that hates Trump) tried to overthrow the White House because Trump gave a huge tax break to the rich and corporations.
Can you help?
@6:13 - Musk wants to slash HHS, CDC, and NIH, because he thinks they can get the same work done with fewer people. He thinks he can get the same research done limiting the overhead to only 15%
DeleteTrump controls the narrative. There's no organizational opposition from Democrats. The Democrats may have already lost the next presidential election. Trump's ratings are constant. Not his approval ratings, his viewership ratings. His is the most visible presence in the world. 77,000,000 voters see him every day, all day. It doesn't matter that he fucks up everything he touches. The Democrats are spectators who occasionally chime in from the peanut gallery. Their game plan, if there even is one, is a loser.
DeleteDavid says: "He [Musk] thinks...". You lost me at that. There's no indication that Musk thinks about any of these things. None. He has no basis for his conclusion. Musk knows nothing about research and what it takes to keep the lights on. This is how it's clear that one is suffering from MDS (Musk Delusion Syndrome): suggesting that Musk actually thinks. Musk is a troll who wantonly destroys things.
DeleteMusk might not succeed, He might inadvertently wind up eliminating useful stuff. But there is an indication of what he thinks. He says he’s eliminating waste and fraud. I think that shows that he intends to only eliminate waste and fraud. He
Deletedoesn’t intend to eliminate any useful functions.
Above comment from me. It’s a response.to Ilya
DeleteThere are two ways to cut waste and fraud without cutting useful stuff.
Delete1. Scalpel -- Look at each bit of government. Identify the waste and fraud and carefully cut only that.
2. Chainsaw -- cut broadly. When useful stuff was cut, carefully bring it back.
Musk is using #2. #1 will not work. How can Musk identify waste and fraud in each department. If he asks each department to identify their own waste and fraud, they will not really do it.
Note that much of the waste is in using inefficient procedures. E.g., processing government retiree benefits by hand in the bottom of a mine.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/elon-musk-retirement-mine/
Making this process is not simply a matter of cutting stuff. If means creating a new computer system to do the work.
#2 is not a recognized approach to eliminating waste. It is called throwing out the baby with the bath water, and is generally regarded as a bad thing to do. #1 does work. It is the job of managers at every level of govt, just as it is the job in business. Govts create and justify budgets and are held accountable for spending just like businesses are.
DeleteIn this situation, Trump and Musk have arbitrarily labeled programs they disagree with or dislike as waste and cut them without authority, including programs with Congressional authorization that cannot legally be eliminated by the President. The courts are restoring such programs, not Musk or Doge or Trump. Courts are ordering that they be restored, not piecemeal but in whole.
Many people regard creating a new computer system for social security to be a good idea. It was last estimated to take 5 years and require a lot of money and staff, so it was not approved to be done. What is new is AI. It may be that AI can shorten the time and resources needed to improve the software used by SS. If so, great, but that is not what Doge was mandated to do, nor is it why they laid off and fired so many people in such a haphazard way. This is a new effort that is unconnected to Doge.
David is adopting the given rationale provided by Musk & Trump at face value. It is another big lie. No one in their right mind fires people in critical positions only to discover they are necessary and then must lure them back to work. That is a screw-up not a plan.
David says #1 won't work because staff won't really cut their own departments. That's why external auditors exist. Musk and Trump fired all of the Inspector Generals, the independent auditors whose job is to eliminate waste and fraud. If you fire those guys, of course such a plan won't work -- not because such a system doesn work but because the needed staff to implement it has been fired.
As I sit here writing, there is a massive rain and thunderstorm outside my window. I find myself how long weather reports warning of such things will be reliable once NOAA is gone. Who in their right mind cuts the scientists and experts who monitor weather and provide reports to pilots and air traffic controllers to ensure safer flights? This isn't only about having accurate info about how warmly to dress for tomorrow.
typo: I find myself wondering how long...
Delete"How can Musk identify waste and fraud in each department. If he asks each department to identify their own waste and fraud, they will not really do it."
DeleteFunny thing is though, there were all these Inspector Generals who knew a lot about waste, fraud and potential fraud in their departments.
But they got canned right out of the gate, because they would get in the way of all the lying to come.
"He thinks he can get the same research done limiting the (federal grant) overhead to only 15%."
DeleteHe can. This is just a cost shift from the federal gvt. to the universities etc. that employ the researchers.
If the IGs knew how to eliminate waste and fraud, they would have already done so. They were fired because they failed to do their job.
DeleteTrue anecdote. The company I worked for, USF&G, was near bankruptcy, so they fired a bunch of people. They accidentally fired all the people who knew the combination of the company vault. An embarrassing foul up. But, it didn't really matter. When the problem became visible, they dealt with it.
There is no evidence that Musk is finding waste.
Delete"He thinks he can get the same research done limiting by he overhead to 15%"
DeleteThis quote has all the hallmarks of DiC. It pretends to know why Musk has taken a chainsaw to government funded research. The idea itself lacks credibility, that is, Musk is assumed to understand the workings of the research comm in both well enough to arrive at his destructive plan.
Wouldn't a researcher keep trying just as hard to get grants if her institution got a extra 15% of the grant amount rather than 30%? Of course she would.
Delete1:13 continued. The mainstay of government research grants is designated RO1. The success rate of obtaining funding after submitting an RO1 application is 20%; that is, 1 in five grant proposals, after peer review, obtains funding. Much of this goes to already established researchers, making it exceedingly competitive and difficult to get a toe hold in an academic career relying in large part on NIH funding. There is zero evidence that any thoughtful process was in play when Musk made these cuts, which have had devastating consequences on lives dedicated to careers in basic research. I know 2 college seniors who were awarded placement in PhD programs at major academic centers who have had those offers rescinded after Musk's cuts, the rationale for which no explanation has been given. That is because there is none. Rubes like DiC nod their heads in approval as the foundation of this country's expertise in science is attacked by this administration. 45 billion dollars are allocated to NIH funding out of a federal budget of 1.6 trillion dollars, or 2.8 %. This country deserves better than the clownish machinations of a chainsaw wielding narcissist and his unvetted minions.
DeleteMinimizing the amount of waste by showing it as a ratio to some other number is a trick that fools nobody. The number of dollars save is what's important.
DeleteBarack Obama had a better understanding than @11:46.
"No amount of waste is acceptable, especially when it’s your money," Obama said, referring to American taxpayers. "Just as families are living within their means, government should too."
Obama even provided some examples of this "stupid spending," asking viewers, "Did you know the federal government pays for a website devoted to a folk music ensemble made up of forest rangers? They’re called the ‘Fiddlin’ Foresters.’"
If the number of dollars saved is what is important, why is it the consensus that Musk’s estimate of those saved dollars is markedly off, favoring in all cases that of his narrative? Slashing budgets is easy. Dealing with the consequences is complicated. We have all seen pie charts of the US budget. Explain why Musk’s fascination seems to be with cutting the budgets of the smallest slices. You spend a lot of time on this website marketing the idea that Musk’s budget cuts will have a significant impact on the deficit of which your orange Jesus has to date been the largest single contributor. You do not deserve to be taken seriously so long as you fastidiously ignore that increasing revenue is necessary to obtain that goal. Trump’s tax cuts benefitting the wealthy and slashing the budget of IRS enforcement receive zero attention from you and other cult members, which precludes you from an honest discussion of this country’s budgetary problems.
DeleteYour brilliant costcutter has tweeted Defund NPR, which gets 1% of its revenue from the federal government, and Defund the ACLU, which gets 0%. Yeah, the asshat that got billions upon billions of taxpayer subsidies to keep his car company afloat. No wonder Tesla is tanking. People are sick to death of this liar and his 19-20 yo tech bros with zero credibility or oversight, let alone vetting, hacksaw indiscriminately through our federal government and throw up nonsense numbers to justify themselves.
Delete"Defund NPR, which gets 1% of its revenue from the federal government"
DeleteYeah, 1% directly plus 50% indirectly.
Mr. President, please end taxpayer funding of scummy globalist propaganda.
Trump and Musk are so incompetent.
DeleteThey were supposed to cut waste, fraud, and abuse, but Cecelia, David in Cal, and Mao are all still here.
There are two ways to cut waste and fraud without cutting useful stuff...
DeleteWhen Republicans find a record-breaking criminal fraudster, then elect him to the US Senate. As everyone understands, it is not the end users of government services who commit the fraud, it is the service providers who commit the fraud. DiC is so full of shit it's coming out of his ears.
Wouldn't a researcher keep trying just as hard to get grants if her institution got a extra 15% of the grant amount rather than 30%? Of course she would.
DeleteDickhead in Cal reminds us once again why every fucking goddamned republican accusation is a confession.
Yes, Dickhead, I am totally convinced you would cheat the government if you had the chance. The less IRS auditors we have the easier it gets, eh Dickhead?
"Minimizing the amount of waste by showing it as a ratio to some other number is a trick that fools nobody."
DeleteMinimizing waste by pretending programs you disagree with are 'waste' fools no one.
"If the IGs knew how to eliminate waste and fraud, they would have already done so. They were fired because they failed to do their job."
DeleteGullible as always, DiC. Trump serves it up, and you slurp it down.
Soros-bot always, Hector. Nothing but word-salads.
DeleteThis is why it is ridiculous to dignify anything Dickhead in Cal writes on here. He is not interested in honest discourse.
DeleteDavid in Cal's calls to de-fund the police are getting louder and more aggressive every day.
DeleteKeep it up, David.
Make Cops Get a Real Job.
DIC is nots serious contributor here, never has been. He just parrots misinformation most of the time.
DeleteAre we sure Hotep Jesus isn't really Andy Kaufmann?
ReplyDeleteAndy Kauffman ate our cats and dogs.
DeleteJust kidding. I just love bigotry.
Yes, this Hotep stuff is so funny!
Deleteتعقيم الخزان ليس مجرد خطوة اختيارية، بل هو ضرورة لقتل الجراثيم والبكتيريا التي قد تكون موجودة حتى بعد الغسيل.
ReplyDeleteتنظيف خزانات
تنظيف خزانات
If Somerby really cared about immigration, he would moderate his blog to eliminate such comments. This is an arabic phrase about tank cleaning and sterilization. It used to be that such messages were code aimed at specific individuals told to watch for such messages. Is Somerby's blog now a drop for sleeper agents or is there a troll who is communicating with a para-military extremist group somewhere in the US? Why else would such a message appear here?
Delete"While all eyes are on Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's attack plans posted on Signal, there was another dangerous leak from the Trump administration, according to a new report.
ReplyDeleteThe media is largely focused on the Signal chat scandal, but according to Rolling Stone, there is another leak that should be spoken about.
"Reports that Donald Trump’s top national security officials accidentally shared their Yemen attack plans withThe Atlantic in real-time drove the news in official Washington in recent days," the report states. "But it wasn’t the only damaging leak of information held by the administration this week."
The report continues, "Two Trump administration spreadsheets — which each include what numerous advocates and government officials say is highly sensitive information on programs funded by the U.S. State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) — were sent to Congress and also leaked online."
The outlet further reports that, "The leak, which sent a variety of international groups and nonprofits scrambling to assess the damage and protect workers operating under repressive regimes, came after the organizations had pressed the Trump administration to keep the sensitive information private and received some assurances it would remain secret."
The report continues:
"The nonprofit leaders and others reminded State Department personnel — some of whom are career officials aghast at what Team Trump and Musk are doing, and wished to contain unnecessary damage — that various programs that the department had on file had long been marked 'sensitive,' and that their information was not meant for public consumption."
Rolling Stone reports one person saying, “Lives are in danger that did not have to be.”
Another individual, an international non-profit executive, also weighed in:
"In all our years of receiving grants from a range of governments, we have never seen the safety of government partners treated with such reckless abandon. People will lose their liberty, and possibly even more, because of this.” [Rawstory]
This was obviously not accidental.
Delete...we have never seen the safety of government partners treated with such reckless abandon. People will lose their liberty, and possibly even more, because of this.”
You aint seen nuthin' yet.
HIMES: Do you think it’s responsible for you, as head of the intelligence community, to retweet posts from individuals affiliated with Russian state media?
GABBARD: That retweet came from my personal account.
HIMES: Personal account? You’re the Director of National Intelligence, not an Instagram influencer. There’s no such thing as “personal” when you’re elevating Kremlin propaganda.
GABBARD: I have the right to share information—
HIMES: Information? You mean Russian disinformation. You sit in high-level intelligence briefings, then turn around and boost the same narratives Moscow is pushing. Should we just CC the Kremlin on your next meeting and cut out the middleman?
GABBARD: This is just an attempt to smear me—
HIMES: Smear you? You lied under oath in a Senate hearing yesterday, claiming you knew nothing about classified information, while sitting in Signal chats where war plans were discussed. You retweet Kremlin-backed sources, then act shocked when people question your loyalties.
GABBARD: I’m focused on national security—
HIMES: National security? While pushing Russian propaganda and pretending you’re clueless about intelligence leaks? If a Democrat had done half of this, you’d be screaming treason on national TV.
GABBARD: This is about free speech—
HIMES: Free speech? You’re the President’s top intelligence advisor, not some random guy on Twitter. Every word you amplify has consequences. And right now, you’re handing America’s enemies exactly what they want—straight from your "personal account."
That was our current Director of National Security at a Senate hearing whining about her free speech.
These people really are from the "Tribe that rubs shit in their hair"
Putin's ROI for his purchase of the Republican Party is paying off in spades.
DeleteHas been for years.
Delete"“President Trump has selected Sara Carter, a conservative journalist and Fox News contributor, as the nation’s next drug czar,” Stat reports.
ReplyDelete“Carter’s selection comes as a surprise: Her background is not in drug policy, public health, or law enforcement, and she has never served in government.”
Appointing unqualified people to important jobs is a major form of waste because of the extra time it will take for them to learn things and come up to speed, and because of the mistakes large and small that they will make before learning their jobs.
More DEI hires.
DeleteHegseth’s younger brother is serving in a key role as liaison and senior adviser inside the Pentagon.
Based on Phil Hegseth’s publicly available resume, his past experience includes founding his own podcast production company, Embassy and Third, and working on social media and podcasts at The Hudson Institute.
I am sure he was the best and most qualified person for the job, right Dickhead in Cal?
I'm sure he's a bigot, or he never would have gotten an interview in the first place.
DeleteHa, ha, ha.
ReplyDeleteYou heard the one about the Republican voter who isn't a bigot, too?
DeleteA long and slow fanny burp relieved the tension that held the room captive.
ReplyDeleteLaughter soon erupted, and a good time was had by all.
“Trump has ample warning from financial markets of how harmful his tariffs will be. He is proceeding anyway, because the only way he can feel alive and fulfilled is by intentionally hurting people.”
ReplyDelete— David Frum
If the people didn't want a self-inflicted recession, they wouldn't have voted for the monstrosity in the first place. It won't be long before he starts shooting people on 5th Avenue in broad daylight.
DeleteA Very Stable Genius
Delete"The duties Trump promised, pre-inauguration, to levy on Canada and Mexico his first day in office shifted to Feb. 1, then Feb. 4, then March 4, before being largely rolled back until April 2."
DeleteDavid Frum has ample warning that he's mentally ill, suffering from an extreme case of TDS. He is proceeding anyway, because he's mentally ill, suffering from TDS.
We must embrace our TDS, we must cuddle it and nurture it if we are to make it through this dark night.
DeleteTwo possible effects of the fluctuating tariffs.
Delete1. The uncertainty will discourage business, thus hurting the economy. The uncertainty will cause our allies to less support US policies.
2. The uncertainty will make more foreign businesses move parts of their operations to the United States, thus helping the economy. The uncertainty will motivate our allies to move toward policies the US wants.
11:38: I don’t see how Frum’s statement shows he is mentally ill. If you think Trump’s tariffs are a genius move, you should embrace Frum’s diagnosis. After all, musk said “The fundamental weakness of western civilization is empathy.” Are you going to call musk a liar?
DeleteWhich of the two is more likely, DiC? Are you willing to accept #1 as the price of electing Trump?
Delete@12:28 PM, word-salad much?
Delete@12:22 PM, David,
Allies? Wtf, what allies? Do you understand what the word "business" means?
Tariffs is the standard way to develop the domestic economy, and especially manufacturing. Bob's God Abraham Lincoln is famous for his pro-tariffs politics.
12:22,
Deleteyou leave out the third possibility, already in motion: the tariffs will motivate foreign businesses to find customers and build supply chains in countries other than the US.
Tariffs led to the Great Depression. Study some history, 12:37.
Delete@12:30 - I will be unhappy and disappointed if the bad (1) is the result. I do not know which is more likely. I am simultaneously worried and optimistic.
DeleteYou Trump fluffers should be glad trump likes to hurt people. It’s the only way to bring back the utopia that was the US prior to 1913.
DeleteFrum’s statement is dumb. When a smart person says dumb things that’s a symptom of TDS. Frum wrongly says:
Delete1. The fact that many people say tariffs won’t work means that it’s a fact that the tariffs definitely won’t work.
2. Trump knows tariffs won’t work.
3. Thus Trump must have have bad motives for his tariffs.
@12:38 PM
DeleteIf you say so, Mr. Soros. Whatever you say, Sir.
Or perhaps Frum is right. Besides, DiC, Frum didn’t say whether Trump knows they will work. It’s a fact that there will be disruptions in the financial markets. I mean, how long do you think it would take to reestablish manufacturing in the us, if you believe that is Trump’s goal? Until such a magical time occurs, there will be pain, and a lot of people will feel it, people who were promised lower prices by Trump on day one. You also have to consider that you were reading a blog where the blogger frequently opines that Trump may be a sociopath. Maybe Frum and Somerby are on the same page here with their diagnoses.
DeleteOn March 3, the GDPNow model estimate for real GDP growth in the first quarter of 2025 is -2.8 percent, down from -1.5 percent on February 28.
DeleteWhat is the definition of a recession, Dickhead?
"that’s a symptom of TDS"
DeleteAny TDS is good TDS.