WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 20, 2025
On Monday, Trump said something quite similar: On Monday, the president spoke to Emmanuel Macron, president of a vexatious nation called France.
His words were captured by an active mike. He'd just spoken to Putin on the phone. Strangely enough, the president now said this:
PRESIDENT TRUMP (8/18/25): I think he wants to make a deal. I think he wants to make a deal for me.
Do you understand that? As crazy as it sounds.
[Addressing the entire room]
Sit down. Sit down, everybody. I think we’ll let the press come in for a minute.
He seemed to be saying that Vladimir Putin wanted to fashion a peace deal. More remarkably, he seemed to be saying that Putin wanted to fashion a peace deal for him, apparently as some sort of favor for the sitting American president
The president said that sounded crazy. We're strongly inclined to agree.
We also agree with the various analysts who have said it was a very strange moment when Trump said that to Macron. Also this:
When we heard the tap of what Trump said, we thought of the great novella by Joyce. Inevitably, we thought of the climactic scene of the acclaimed story, The Dead.
The leading authority guides us:
The Dead (Joyce short story)
"The Dead" is the final short story in the 1914 collection Dubliners by James Joyce. It is by far the longest story in the collection and, at 15,952 words, is almost long enough to be described as a novella. The story deals with themes of love and loss, as well as raising questions about the nature of the Irish identity.
The story was well-received by critics and academics and described by T. S. Eliot as one of the greatest English-language short stories ever written. It was later adapted into...the 1987 film The Dead written by Tony Huston and directed by John Huston.
[...]
Joyce biographer and critic Richard Ellmann wrote: "In its lyrical, melancholy acceptance of all that life and death offer, 'The Dead' is a linchpin in Joyce's work."...On the centennial of the release of Dubliners, Dan Barry of The New York Times called "The Dead" "just about the finest short story in the English language."
This story offers a critique of a society that has been gripped by a deadening paralysis of the spirit...
Ah yes, the "deadening paralysis of the spirit"—the paralysis that had somehow managed to grip the Irish society Joyce believed he saw around him. But let's focus on the direct connection between that widely acclaimed short story and the peculiar thing the president recently said.
We turn now to the end of Joyce's story—to the end of a long and convivial night:
The elderly sisters Kate and Julia Morkan have staged their annual party in celebration of Twelfth Night. Now, as the party is winding down, a revelation is drawing near. It will involve Gabriel Conroy, nephew to the Misses Morkan, and his wife, Gretta Conroy:
As the party winds down, the guests filter out, and Gabriel prepares to leave. He finds his wife standing, apparently lost in thought, at the top of the stairs. In another room Bartell D'Arcy sings "The Lass of Aughrim."
The Conroys leave; and Gabriel is excited, for it has been a long time since he and Gretta have had a night in a hotel to themselves. When they arrive at the hotel, Gabriel's aspirations of passionate lovemaking are conclusively dashed by Gretta's lack of interest.
He presses her about what is bothering her, and she admits that she is "thinking about that song, The Lass of Aughrim." She admits that it reminds her of someone, a young man named Michael Furey, who had courted her in her youth in Galway. He used to sing "The Lass of Aughrim" for her.
Michael Furey used to sign that song for her, she says. She has thereby started to echo the president's peculiar statement.
Her revelation continues from there. You can see Anjelica Huston performing this scene simply by clicking this. Our advice to you would be this:
Don't cheat yourself out of watching.
For our money, the actor Donal McCann, playing her husband, may not have captured the scene in quit the way she did. We'll attribute that to imperfect direction. But as you can see by clicking this, these are the lines from Joyce's original text in which the revelation about Michael Furey is being completed:
“He is dead,” she said at length. “He died when he was only seventeen. Isn’t it a terrible thing to die so young as that?”
“What was he?” asked Gabriel, still ironically.
“He was in the gasworks,” she said.
Gabriel felt humiliated by the failure of his irony and by the evocation of this figure from the dead, a boy in the gasworks. While he had been full of memories of their secret life together, full of tenderness and joy and desire, she had been comparing him in her mind with another.
[...]
“I suppose you were in love with this Michael Furey, Gretta,” he said.
“I was great with him at that time,” she said.
Her voice was veiled and sad. Gabriel, feeling now how vain it would be to try to lead her whither he had purposed, caressed one of her hands and said, also sadly:
“And what did he die of so young, Gretta? Consumption, was it?”
“I think he died for me,” she answered.
(“Poor fellow,” Gretta soon says. “He was very fond of me and he was such a gentle boy.")
I think he died for me, she said. For our money, Anjelica Huston's performance of this story cuts extremely deep.
More than a century later, the strange man who is this nation's sitting president made a somewhat similar declaration, in this case regarding the deep friendship he seems to believe he maintains with Russia's Vladimir Putin.
Gretta's story continues from there. We thought of that famous scene from The Dead when we heard the tape of what the president recently said.
At this juncture, we'll recommend this part of the synopsis we've posted above:
The Dead offers a critique of a society that has been gripped by a deadening paralysis of the spirit...
Our own society lies in the grip of a similar paralysis. That deadening paralysis is reflected, on a minute to minute basis, by the shriveled way our own Blue American tribunes are willing or able to discuss the remarkable oddness of the sitting president, the revolutionary leader in question.
Is something wrong with President Trump? If so, that would of course be a human tragedy—but under the circumstances, it would also represent a dangerous state of affairs.
Is something wrong with President Trump? The tribunes of our deadened world have agreed to avoid that obvious question. This Monday, the question loomed up again, as the president made a very strange declaration in a whispered aside to the president of France.
He seems to think that the man he calls "Vladimir" wants to fashion a peace deal—wants to fashion a peace deal for him! Presumably, this's an example of delusional thinking of the highest possible order.
What might that mean about President Trump? Tomorrow and Friday, we'll return to that question—but we leave you today with this broader point:
Those of us in Blue America need to step beyond our own tribe's deadened spirit. We need to see ourselves for who we are—and for who we plainly aren't at this point.
We need to find a richer way of understanding our current predicament. We may need to find the way that our deadened civilization can be "renewed by...the undemocratic but sovereign power of the imagination, by the undemocratic power which makes poets the unacknowledged legislators of all mankind, the power which makes all things new."
We may need to let our feelings bloom, perhaps by consulting the poets, with Joyce as one example.
"I think he died for me," she said. As her story continues, we see that the weeping Gretta wasn't caught in the grip of a delusion in her thought about the gentle boy who died when he was just 17.
Almost surely, our sitting president is. We very badly need to discuss the actual situation our deadened society is in.
We need to get wiser and deeper and better. What is actually going on within that peculiar man—within the revolutionary leader who, we're told, was divinely appointed to his current post?
Tomorrow: Delusions and fixed ideas
ReplyDeleteJeez. All this long idiotic word-salad because of "he wants to make a deal"? Why am I still reading this TDS crap?
"Why am I still reading this TDH crap?"
DeleteFTFY, an obvious typo.
Somerby TLDR: Trump is a delusional moron.
DeleteNo, nimrod 10:28. It's obviously not because of "he wants to make a deal". It's because of "for me."
DeleteGod you're stupid.
At least the Democratic party is not hemorrhaging voters.
ReplyDeleteSomerby tries mightily to connect these unconnected stories, but it just doesn't work. Especially given that the James Joyce story reveals the truth, whereas we do not known what Trump was thinking or Putin's intentions. And it is all unnecessary. There are much better ways to realize that Trump is wrong in the head.
ReplyDeleteBeyond this, if we assume that Trump is not demented, he has never been right, even when a much younger man. His call-ins to Howard Stern pretending to be his own publicist, in order to brag about seducing famous women, show that. His money laundering, his hanging out with mob members in NYC, his bankruptcies and failures in business after business, his abrupt switch from Democrat to Republican in order to gull red voters and run under Putin's guidance, his birtherism, and his ongoing abuse of women. None of that shows a man fit to be president, but Republicans elected him anyway. What's a little dementia thrown into that horrible mix of traits and behaviors?
Somerby ruins a fine old short story (and film) by trying to dignify Trump's actions by reference to an entirely unrelated bit of literature. Shame on him. If Somerby wants to finally reject Trump, he can just say so without hinting around that Democrats are dead and it is all our fault that we cannot have good sex with a current husband because of nostalgia for a past lover.
No thank. I do not like James Joyce much, and I am Irish myself. There is a lot more to the story than Somerby has grabbed here with the chance mention of someone who "died for me" (which is not anything like Trump saying Putin wants to make a deal for him). I don't know or care what may have happened to a 17 year old in that story. Somerby doesn't tell us, which leaves us to wonder if that is Somerby's omission or wasn't in the book. But it doesn't matter because Trump's relationship with Putin is not a love story. It is treason.
It is unnecessary to speculate about why Trump believes Putin is enamored of him. We more objective observers of history know that Putin would not hesitate to shove Trump out of a window if he had the chance and thought he could get away with it. That Trump is fooled by Putin is just one more reason why Trump is unfit to be president. But Trump has always been unfit. The more important question is why red voters have been fooled by Trump for so long, and why they are letting this go on. Are they dead too? Somerby doesn't say.
The more important question is why red voters have been fooled by Trump for so long, and why they are letting this go on.
Delete“Get over [your] dictator phobia.”
JD Vance’s hero Curtis Yarvin
This is not hard to explain. Some people such as DiC want a dictatorship. They are loving watching King Orange Chickenshit take over democratic cities one by one.
The cause of the Ukraine war is one man’s ego. Russian citizens don’t have an inherent antipathy to Ukrainians. Russia was not in danger from Ukraine. Putin personally started the war. Putin can end the war whenever he feels like it.
ReplyDeleteA way to end the war might be to change Putin’s personal desire for conquest. That may be impossible. But it makes sense for Trump to try to build a relationship that Putin will personally value. Maybe a desire for worldwide acceptance will moderate Putin’s desire for conquest. It’s worth a try.
Go fuck yourself, you fascist freak.
DeleteRussia has been the enemy of the US during a long series of leaders. I think it is a mistake to assume that Putin is responsible for ambitions that predate his arrival as leader of Russia.
DeleteThe cause of that war is, David,... well, why don't I quote John Mearsheimer for you. Not that it's going to convince anyone.
Delete" The taproot of the trouble is NATO enlargement, the central element of a larger strategy to move Ukraine out of Russia's orbit and integrate it into the West. ... the EU's expansion eastward and the West's backing of the pro-democracy movement in Ukraine ... were critical elements, too. Since the mid-1990s, Russian leaders have adamantly opposed NATO enlargement, and in recent years, they have made it clear that they would not stand by while their strategically important neighbor turned into a Western bastion. For Putin, the illegal overthrow of Ukraine's democratically elected and pro-Russian president (Viktor Yanukovych)—which he rightly labeled a "coup"—was the final straw. He responded by taking Crimea, a peninsula he feared would host a NATO naval base, and working to destabilize Ukraine until it abandoned its efforts to join the West. Putin's pushback should have come as no surprise."
Mearsheimer called Putin "a first-class strategist who should be feared and respected" on foreign policy. He argued that Putin is driven by "legitimate security concerns" and does not want to occupy Ukraine."
"When Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, Mearsheimer re-affirmed his belief that the West were largely to blame. In March 2022, he was interviewed by Isaac Chotiner of The New Yorker. Mearsheimer again blamed the invasion on "NATO expansion, EU expansion", and attempts to "turn Ukraine into a pro-American liberal democracy", arguing that "from a Russian perspective, this is an existential threat". He said Putin was not interested in conquering Ukraine and that Ukraine should "break off its close relations with the West ... and try to accommodate the Russians.""
Gorbachev was a good man, I don't think he saw us as the enemy.
Delete"turn Ukraine into a pro-American liberal democracy"
DeleteThe horror, the horror.
Anyway, Prince Orange Chickenshit took care of the democracy part of that - Russia no longer has to worry about any confounded democracy.
"When Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, Mearsheimer re-affirmed his belief that the West were largely to blame."
DeleteThis position puts him at odds with most of the US foreign policy establishment. He's well-known as a foreign policy "realist," one who observes how nations behave, not one who advocates for any particular political ideology.
At any rate, the bits of analysis you quote stop with Putin's reason for invasion. We've had three years of Putin slaughtering civilians since then. Do you suppose that's the fault of the West as well?
Yes Putin paid American influencers on the right to spout the horror of Ukraine being Western friendly for decades. But where in this analysis is Putin's own mission; to restore the USSR? Makes your argument bullshit don't it?
DeleteThanks for the quote @11:22. Mearsheimer isn't the only one propounding the theory that NATO enlargement was primary cause of Russia's attack on Ukraine. But, I disagree. What were Russia's "legitimate security concerns"? Was Russia concerned that NATO would invade Russia? Of course not. NATO is purely defensive.
Delete"But it makes sense for Trump to try to build a relationship that Putin will personally value."
DeleteThat may make sense but what's actually happening, as evidenced by Trump's aside to Macron, is:
1) Putin has convinced Trump that he (Putin) wants a deal, when he clearly doesn't, and
2) Putin has convinced Trump that he wants a deal, not in the interests of the Russian nation, but as a favor to Trump.
"For me", said Trump, no doubt a little starry-eyed as he spoke.
What a deluded old fool.
Not that it's going to convince anyone.
DeleteIt's not. If Russia didn't have nuclear weapons, European and Ukrainians troops would've been sipping tea from a samovar in Kremlin three'n a half years ago. In other words, Russia's nuclear deterrent is what insures against any invasion or an attack. Their conventional forces are third world.
Now, Putin, on a personal level, maybe had trepidations about having a European type democracy next door. Particularly given that Ukrainians are all fluent in Russian and are so ethnically close. It was always about Putin's power. It is pointless to talk about Russia as a separate entity from Putin.
At some point, one would think maggots would be so embarrassed. European leaders had to rush over to shield Zelensky from that treasonous bastard. Then in the middle of the meeting with Z and the European leaders, Prince Orange Chickenshit leaves the room to call his boss, Putin, and spends about 3/4 of an hour on the phone with no one else present and no explanation. What in the actual fuck is going on? How much longer will we have to pretend this imbecile is not a traitor?
DeleteHector - you may be exactly right. Putin tricked past Presidents into believing that he had good intentions. I hope Trump's efforts lead to a reasonable peace, but there's a good chance Trump will fail.
DeletePutin tricked past Presidents into believing that he had good intentions.
DeleteNo he didn't, fuckface. Prince Orange Chickenshit is the only president who sucks Putin's dick in public. No one else was fooled, asshole.
Hey DiChead, who is the woke SOB who said this about the Smithsonian Museum?, "“I’m deeply proud that we now have a museum that honors the millions of African American men and women who built our national heritage, especially when it comes to faith, culture and the unbreakable American spirit,”
DeleteWeirdos and jagoffs, the whole lot of you.
Other than George W., I share 12:57's questioning of your claim about past presidents, DiC. Did he fool Obama or Biden?
DeleteGeorge W. looked into Putin's eyes and saw that he had a "good soul". Other than Trump's delusions about his "relationship" with Putin, no one else has ever come close.
DeleteHey David, what woke mothertucker said this in 2017?, “I’m deeply proud that we now have a museum that honors the millions of African American men and women who built our national heritage, especially when it comes to faith, culture and the unbreakable American spirit,” you racist fascist POS.
DeleteQIB -who was to blame when Putin invaded Ukraine in 2014? Moose & Squirrel?
DeleteI don't think it's true that our society splits neatly into red and blue. The problem with that framework is that it allows one side of the equation to dictate the boundaries. A simple binary construction allows "red" to stake out its territory; everything else, by definition becomes "blue."
ReplyDeleteThat's not quite right.
In today's post, Our Host offers this:
Those of us in Blue America need to step beyond our own tribe's deadened spirit. We need to see ourselves for who we are—and for who we plainly aren't at this point.
We need to find a richer way of understanding our current predicament. We may need to find the way that our deadened civilization can be "renewed by...the undemocratic but sovereign power of the imagination, by the undemocratic power which makes poets the unacknowledged legislators of all mankind, the power which makes all things new."
We may be able to do some such by stepping outside the intellectual and spiritual poverty of the moment—the poverty of the shriveled discourse which emerges from our current round-the-clock pseudo-news environment.
There's apparently a third faction in the current battle, one that isn't red or blue. It's the faction that produces the kingpins of our news organizations, a faction that may have leanings toward one side or the other but, in the end, cares only for its own power and profit.
That "round-the-clock news environment" isn't made up of "Blue America's tribunes," but of members of this third group, the one that pretends to mediate the red/blue quarrels.
The red team likes to complain bitterly about the mainstream liberal media, assigning it a role in the blue teams ranks. As we have rather slowly come to notice over the past 30 years or so, that just isn't how it works. The major news organizations are members of a third, unnamed and unnoticed team that capitalizes on the ongoing red/blue fight, not on its outcome.
And yes, Blue America really would benefit from stepping outside the spiritual poverty that produces the members of this parasitical third team.
I think there’s a fourth faction: the politicians. When there are issues affecting the well-being of members of Congress, political unity occurs. Reps and Dems both put their own interests ahead of conservative and liberal voters.
DeleteEasier to understand your thoughts if you will enclose the parts that Somerby said in quote marks so that we can tell when you are speaking again as yourself.
DeleteI agree with your formulation of media as a third group, especially given that it is a journalistic value to remain above the political fray without taking sides, but I believe you, like Somerby, tend to conflate opinion writers with reporters.
I do not see a "spiritual poverty" with people like Rachel Maddow, Heather Cox Richardson, Thom Hartmann, and quite a few other opinion writers who represent left wing views in astute essays every day, trying to understand and address current events and politics. They do not deserve to be lumped in with hosts of talk shows on cable news or even hack opinion writers in the NY Times. They are neither parasitical nor impoverished, in my opinion. Somerby never discusses those parts of blue America. Please don't follow his lead on that.
David's idea that politicians do not work for the people suggests he doesn't believe they are doing their jobs as representatives in the legislature. I think that varies from person to person, but that Democrats are less likely to put party before all than Republicans are. There is a Republican loyalty to self-interest, embodied by loyalty to Trump and party before public good on the right that is not mirrored on the left, where I believe different elected officials also have loyalty to causes such as environmentalism, growing their state or local community, supporting Democratic values and promoting progress, that doesn't exist on the right. In other words, I disagree with David that all politicians are alike and out for their own advancement. That is a cynical view that is more typical of the right (especially Ayn Rand followers) than the left.
Delete@11:02 Where you draw the boundaries that separate Blue from Other is up to you. You want to claim Maddow, et al, as "blue," you go.
DeleteI have long been perplexed by Our Host's propensity for assigning Team Blue responsibility for voices who plainly don't speak or act in that team's interests. My comment today is in service of a new realization that a binary split doesn't describe our world very well.
Fuck off fascist David.
DeleteQiB, agree
DeleteHey DiChead, what WOKE motherfucking Republican politician said this in 2017 about the Smithsonian, “I’m deeply proud that we now have a museum that honors the millions of African American men and women who built our national heritage, especially when it comes to faith, culture and the unbreakable American spirit,”
DeleteHey DicHead, I'll give you a hint, his initials are 34 Felonies.
DeleteSomerby says we blues have a deadened spirit. Is he oblivious to the anger and hope-fueled resistance on the left? Has he ever heard AOC or Jasmine Crockett speak? Has he watched what Karen Bass said in LA or what Gavin Newson is doing in CA? Did he listen to anything Kamala Harris said during her campaign? Apparently not. Was the resistance of blue legislators in TX as they obstructed proposed gerrymandering "dead"? Only to someone like Somerby, who seems to be projecting his own feelings onto both Joyce and blue politics today.
ReplyDeleteIf there is anyone reading this who cares about Somerby and knows him or his family, perhaps they should intervene. This sounds like a plea for help, psychiatrically speaking, like people sometimes make before attempting suicide. Why is Somerby even reading a story with the title "The Dead," which is usually only assigned in literature classes, not something people read these days.
I have been reading "Coming Up Short," Robert Reich's memoir. He is one of our blue stars (to use Somerby's word) and is far from dead. He is working as hard as anyone to encourage resistance against Trump's corrupt administration and his book is full of hope because that is the kind of life he has lived, the kind of person he is. Meanwhile, Somerby reads dreary Irish moaning and attributes it to us blues when it seems to emanate from himself. If I had spent decades promoting right wing garbage, I might feel dead inside too. But that is for Somerby to discuss with a "carefully selected" therapist, not to project onto us. We are not discouraged and we are working hard to defeat Trump, as are many former red voters who see clearly what is wrong with Trump without needing to compare him to a dead 17 year old (what is WRONG with Somerby?).
The point of The Dead is that people can believe that someone did something for them, out of emotional attachment, when it was unrelated and perhaps had other motives. The delusion belongs to the live person, not the dead one.
ReplyDeleteTrump believes Putin wants to do something for him when we can see that is highly unlikely. It reflects Trump's feelings not Putin's. The delusion belongs to Trump and has little to do with reality, other than for Trump to express his attachment to Putin symbolically.
Often we can use literature to exemplify and clarify things in life that are complex or difficult to understand. In this case, I think Somerby's comparison obfuscates reality. It also seems to normalize Trump by showing that everyday people (albeit Irish) can have similar delusions. Trump doesn't deserve that. Putin is an enemy of the US, not a former lover and it is not just weird but treasonous for Trump to have made Putin into a love object who will do things to win his affection (such as it is). This is Somerby comparison and it is fair to ask why Somerby is going to lengths to normalize a bizarre open mic statement that shows Trump cannot be trusted in foreign relations with an enemy.
This is a good analysis. This is a delusion on Trump's part, who does not understand that he and Putin don't -- and never did -- have a relationship or a friendship. In fact, people like Trump and Putin are incapable of having true friendships that are not transactional.
DeleteIn the book, based on the cited passages -- and maybe I should read the story -- there's a longing predicated on a true emotional attachment, misguided as it may be. What we see with Trump is old-age sentimentality, perhaps fueled by his diminishing cognitive abilities, which is nonetheless delusional.
Ilya - Whether Trump's efforts lead to peace or not will tell us whether Trump is deluded or not. We should re-visit this item in a few months.
Delete@12:24 I was with you up until you got to "It also seems to normalize Trump."
DeleteI don't see it.
Quaker -- It doesn't so much normalize Trump as it makes him seem human; and capable of emotions that a normal person would have.
DeleteTrump's efforts
DeleteBwahaha!!! What fucking efforts, Dickhead? If he is trying to prove to the world he is an ignorant clown, job well done.
David -- No. Just no. There are no efforts. There's a delusion that Putin will do him a favor. The war will stop eventually, probably when Putin gets what he wants. For all intents and purposes, Trump has already acceded to that.
Deleteoof!
ReplyDeleteNew York Times 08/20
The Democratic Party is hemorrhaging voters long before they even go to the polls.
Of the 30 states that track voter registration by political party, Democrats lost ground to Republicans in every single one between the 2020 and 2024 elections — and often by a lot.
That four-year swing toward the Republicans adds up to 4.5 million voters, a deep political hole that could take years for Democrats to climb out from.
The stampede away from the Democratic Party is occurring in battleground states, the bluest states and the reddest states, too, according to a new analysis of voter registration data by The New York Times. The analysis used voter registration data compiled by L2, a nonpartisan data firm.
If only you know, actual votes that take place came out this way. You know?
DeletePresident Hillary Clinton, who won the polls in 2016, sends her regards.
DeleteToo bad for you it's 2025.
DeletePolls are for predicting voting results. When an election is being manipulated, as the 2016 election was, then polls become much less predictive. They did predict the popular vote, but it was precincts in three swing states that were manipulated by Russia on Trump's behalf that swung the election to Trump. And the Comey letter, which clearly affected the polls but happened too close to the election for anyone on Hillary's team to respond effectively.
DeleteOdd the way people now blame the polls, which were essentially correct, and not the wrongdoing of Trump's benefactors, including those from Russia.
That election is absolutely going down in history as swayed by Russia-Republican ratfucking, not voters.
??? Senseless post.
Delete'President Donald Trump suggested on Tuesday that he's a war hero, telling conservative radio show host Mark Levin that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is one and adding, "I guess I am, too."'
ReplyDeleteAnd here I've been saying he's an old fool. He's showing me now I've been way too easy on him.
Someone had to lead the charge against 'ol General Bonespur.
DeleteDelusional, hyperbole, narcissism, plain ol' BS...take your pick with this guy...it's an unhealthy mix of all of them.
ReplyDeleteAnd don't forget deliberate lying for personal gain, in your list.
Delete