SATURDAY, MARCH 14, 2026
...why they behaved as they did: No one will ever ask the children why they did what they did.
Also, no one will ever report or discuss the remarkable fact that these very bad boys and girls went on TV and did it!
We refer to the way the children behaved on Tuesday, March 3—first on The Five, then five hours later on Gutfeld! In fairness, they behave like clowns every day of the week, but their behavior this day was remarkable, even for them.
Even for pigeons like "Tyrus" and Timpf! They're two of the very naughty youngsters to whom we make reference this day. One last time, let's call the roll:
The Five panelists: Tuesday, 3/3/26
Emily Compagno: co-host, Outnumbered
Jessica Tarlov: twice-weekly punching bag
Jesse Watters: host, Jesse Watters Primetime
Dana Perino: co-anchor, America's Newsroom
Tyrus: former professional "wrestler"
Gutfeld! panelists: Tuesday, 3/3/26
Tyrus: former professional "wrestler"
Kat Timpf: comedian
Greg Gutfeld: host
Dave Landau: comedian
Mike Benz: Foundation For Freedom Online
Nine (9) naughty children in all! No one is ever going to ask them why they did what they did.
No one will ever ask Timpf why she said the things she said. No one will ever ask the blowhard Tyrus why he was on the nation's most-watched "cable news" program even though he didn't know the first f*cking thing about the events of four and five days before.
By now, it has been eleven days since Timpf said the things she said. She has never corrected, apologized or explained.
Along with all the rest of these mugs, she has never explained why she acted like something amazingly seamy had happened—when in fact, it just plain never did.
These mugs are never going to explain. Last night, the one guy even got permission to go ahead and say this:
GUTFELD (3/13/26): And finally, the new supreme leader of Iran said they will obtain compensation from America.
In a gesture of good faith, Trump offered his five biggest cows:
[PHOTO, the five co-hosts of The View]
AUDIENCE: [Laughter, hooting, applause]
There! After weeks of self-denial, saying that felt really good!
Back to Tuesday March 3! No one will ever report what those "Unrecognizables" did. You won't read about it at The Atlantic, or in the New York Times.
No columnist will note what they did. Everyone knows that it just isn't done—that the Fox News Channel's actual friends are the posers in Blue America who enable its grisly procedures.
Meanwhile, an interesting moment, or set of moments, occurred in Bill Clinton's deposition on Friday, February 27. Before we show you the relevant text, let the word go forth to the nations:
As every sane person must know by now, Attorney General Bondi has been refusing to obey federal law with respect to "the Epstein files."
The release of those files has been unlawful. Also, it has been targeted—and as every sane person must know by now, Bondi started out by releasing what she had about former president Clinton.
In all candor, she didn't have much! Excitingly, there was one photo of a fully dressed Clinton, sitting upright in a metal chair, receiving some sort of neck rub from a fully clothed, youngish woman.
That had been a moment from one of those flights—from one of the flights in which Bill Clinton was creating the global network which (insert yawn here) would eventually save as many as thirty million lives worldwide in the war against AIDS.
Clinton described that effort in his testimony. We'll wait while you finish your yawn.
Along the way in the deposition, Clinton was asked about the only thing that actually matters to people like us. He was asked about that troubling neck rub.
Whatever a person may think about any of this, we'll show you what Bill Clinton said. We'll identify the questioners to the extent that we're able.
As you can see in the Rev transcript, the first exchange about the rub proceeded as shown below. For full videotape of the deposition, you can just click this:
ATTORNEY (2/27/26): My next question for you is, have you ever had contact with an individual by the name of Chaunte Davies?
PRESIDENT CLINTON: Chauntae was—that's a distinctive name. So I think that was the name of one of his flight attendants.
ATTORNEY: Okay. She's been described on being on a 2002 Africa trip and providing massages. Was she or any other young female on that trip underage at that time?
PRESIDENT CLINTON: Not that I'm aware of.
ATTORNEY: Okay. Did you ever receive a massage or have physical contact from her or anyone else on that trip?
PRESIDENT CLINTON: You've seen the pictures. There was one time when I was sitting up, and I got a back rub—a neck rub. And I think Chauntae did it, but I'm not sure.
For the record:
According to a report by Snopes (link below), Davies was 22 at the time. Later in the deposition, a second exchange occurred:
QUESTIONER: I think it was discussed in the previous round, but that well-known photograph of yourself and Ms. Davies—
What is your recollection of the extent of your interactions with Ms. Davies on that trip?
PRESIDENT CLINTON: Where were we?
QUESTIONER: In Africa. I think it was at the airport, on the way to—
PRESIDENT CLINTON: That's it. We had a good relationship, but it was entirely proper. I never had any personal contact with her, if that's what you imply.
QUESTIONER: Am I right that while on that trip, whether the trip or the flights, did you ever witness or become aware of sexual abuse of any kind?
PRESIDENT CLINTON: I did not.
QUESTIONER: Thank you.
Incredibly, we were now being asked to believe that the former president hadn't abused this young woman! Later, there was also this:
REP. MELANIE STANSBURY (D-NM): The third person I want to talk about briefly is Chauntae Davies. I know we've already mentioned her here today. I know you've already mentioned that she was listed as a flight attendant on the trip to South Africa in 2002 that you took with Jeffrey Epstein.
Are you aware that Chauntae Davies is a survivor who claims she was abused for three years, including during that time period?
PRESIDENT CLINTON: I am now.
REP. STANSBURY: Are you aware that Jeffrey Epstein recruited his victims through calling them masseuses?
PRESIDENT CLINTON: No.
REP. STANSBURY: You're not aware that Jeffrey—
PRESIDENT CLINTON: No. But it doesn't surprise me. But I didn't know that, no.
REP. STANSBURY: Knowing that Jeffrey Epstein recruited hundreds of minors as masseuses to massage him. and knowing that this victim who was a survivor of three years of his sexual abuse as a masseuse was on the plane, does that make you think about the massage you received from her differently?
PRESIDENT CLINTON: Have you seen the picture?
REP. STANSBURY: I have a copy of it right here. Yes.
PRESIDENT CLINTON: Well, I'm sitting up in the—
REP. STANSBURY: I'm just asking if now that you know that Jeffrey Epstein recruited girls as masseuses, does that reframe that photograph? And knowing that there were girls on the plane that were being abused?
Were there actually girls on the plane who were being abused? We aren't real sure about that. See below.
At any rate, Rep. Stansbury continued with a line of questioning which strikes us as slightly peculiar. Eventually, this exchange occurred:
REP. STANSBURY: Part of what I'm trying to do is to ask you—we know there was a survivor that was on the plane. You've stated that you didn't know she was a survivor. I understand that.
But I am asking, now that you are aware that Epstein was recruiting survivors as masseuses, does this make you rethink what you saw as you were traveling and interacting with him?
PRESIDENT CLINTON: I wish Chauntae had told me. I liked her. But I didn't think it was anything unusual and I can't tell you how many airplanes I've been on where rich people ask me to go, and they had someone offering massages.
All these boats that you go on and all that, they all do that. Usually, I don't do that. I'm not into this.
REP. STANSBURY: Well, that certainly raises some other questions about people offering free massages and boats, et cetera.
So said the former president. As he did, Rep. Stansbury hurried off to investigate the entire rest of the world.
Back to President Clinton. He had received a neck rub from Chauntae Davies, age 22, while sitting upright, fully clothed, on a metal chair at an airport.
He said he liked Chauntae Davies. He said he had a good relationship with her on that flight. He said he wished that she had told him that she already was, at that point, a victim of sexual abuse.
He also said that he hadn't seen any evidence of such abuse. With that, we turn to several things Chauntae Davies, a good decent person, has said in recent years.
Her remarks are quoted in this fact check by Snopes. First, Snopes reprints this part of a 2020 news report by The Daily Mail:
Davies acted as an air stewardess on the flight and described being shocked when Clinton boarded the plane, saying he was "charming and sweet."
Davies, now in her early 40s, said of the massage pictures: "Although the image looks bizarre, President Clinton was a perfect gentleman during the trip and I saw absolutely no foul play involving him."
She explained the massage happened when "we had a stop-over for the jet to refuel and while we were in the terminal the ex-President was complaining of stiffness from falling asleep in his chair.
"Ghislaine chimed in to be funny and said that I could give him a massage.
"Everyone had a little chuckle but Ghislaine in her prim British accent insisted and said I was good. The President then asked me, 'Would you mind giving it a crack?' "
Davies was quoted saying that by The Daily Mail. Later, Scopes reports, she made the following poignant statement as part of the Netflix series, "Jeffrey Epstein: Filthy Rich:"
I went from being just the masseuse to being asked to be a personal assistant on this trip. So I was blinded by the opportunity of it. I hadn't gone anywhere really, and to go to Africa was like a dream come true.
I flew from L.A. to New York, the plane was ready on the tarmac when I got there, and I took a seat. Then our guests arrived. It was Bill Clinton, Kevin Spacey and Chris Tucker. I was blown away, like oh my God, it was surreal.
The trip was about the AIDS organization that Clinton had started. This trip to Africa is probably the single most amazing moment of my life, and I remember having this false belief that the abuse had stopped because nothing had happened in Africa. Thinking that maybe it just wasn't going to happen anymore.
But after the Africa trip, the abuse started all over again, and it never stopped after that.
According to Snopes, that's what this good person said. She seemed to be saying that Epstein turned off the abuse when Bill Clinton was around—but the abuse started up all over again after that.
Clinton said he didn't see any abuse. Davies seemed to say that no abuse occurred on that flight.
She was 22 years old at the time. You can see the photo of the shoulder massage, with the fully clothed Clinton sitting upright on a metal chair during a stopover inside an airport terminal.
The exchanges about Davies struck us as the saddest and most interesting part of Bill Clinton's deposition. Those exchanges leave you, and all the rest of us, facing a set of question about ourselves:
Are you able to believe that Bill Clinton, age 56, actually "liked" this 22-year-old woman, but didn't sexually assault her?
Also, are you able to believe that he "acted like a perfect gentleman" during that trip? That he didn't engage in the kind of conduct the snarling mutts of the Fox News Channel like to go on TV and dream up stories about?
Are you able to believe that the trip in question was about AIDS prevention, not about the joys of sexual assault?
Admittedly, AIDS prevention is boring. But are you able to imagine that AIDS prevention is the actual reason why Bill Clinton was on that plane?
This is why we ask:
We live in a smarmy, unintelligent, failing culture which has only one thing on its mind.
Our culture doesn't much care about saving lives around the world. Instead, our culture enjoys the lurid dreams voiced by Gutfeld and Timpf and the rest of the mutts on Tuesday evening, March 3.
On that astonishing occasion, a passel of circus clowns spewed the bullsh*t inside their own empty heads about a lurid, tribally thrilling event—about a lurid, tribally thrilling event which simply never happened.
These sex tales have thrilled us for more than thirty years now—the fight against AIDS not so much. By now, it's all we secretly want to hear. By now, it may be the only we know how to believe.
This is the way a society ends—with a bizarre TV host who seems to loathe women, and with the array of undisguised nut-balls his gong-show program employs.
On March 3, they invented an utterly bogus claim about President Clinton's behavior during his deposition, and then they began to clown. Eleven days later, no one has asked them why they did that, and nobody ever will.
No one at the Times will ask, no one at The Atlantic. Timpf hasn't corrected what she said, and people like her never will.
Last night, they continued their gruesome behavior in too many ways to spend time on. That said, the women of The View are cows once again! The pay is good at the Fox News Channel, and the mutts have all clambered aboard.
The other day when I was lauding Quaker for his wordsmithing skills I forgot to include “Our Gracious Host.” That’s a good one, too.
ReplyDeleteIt is an interesting question whether Somerby provides any value to readers here, or whether we readers add value to his own days.
DeleteWhen Somerby went on and on today about something that happened on March 3, without telling his readers what it was, did you feel like you were learning anything, DG? He could have provided a brief phrase explaining what he was going on about. Why didn't he?
Stunts like that make me suspect that Somerby has ulterior motives. Today's was obviously to generate doubt about the truth of Clinton and Davies statements to the Epstein inquiry. Mission accomplished. His silly teasing about March 3 was gratuitous, coy, passive aggressive. Dishonest.
Today, once again, Somerby reduces all of us to the lowest common denominator and then blames the press for not doing the same.
ReplyDeleteHe claims that treating Clinton like a decent person defies imagination because Fox has been maligning him since its inception. In doing that, he does not challenge Fox's account but instead underlines it. Not only is that unfair to Clinton, but it tells a lie about Somerby himself. He is not here to support Clinton but to reinforce the Fox story about him, that he is a philanderer and abuser of women. Somerby's token protests against that view are present, but his phrasing suggests he doesn't believe Clinton's innocence. That may be partly because sarcasm doesn't come across in print, but also because Somerby's wink wink nod nod after his seemingly performative and weak-tea defenses of Clinton make it seem that his defense of our former Democratic president pro forma and not believable. In this way, Somerby not only muddies the water surrounding Clinton's connection with Epstein, but he implies that he himself doesn't believe the exonerations by the woman involved, much less Clinton's own testimony.
Somerby's own defenders here want us to believe that he is truly supporting Clinton's innocence, but that doesn't fit with Somerby's own statements, including these:
"Are you able to believe that Bill Clinton, age 56, actually "liked" this 22-year-old woman, but didn't sexually assault her?
Also, are you able to believe that he "acted like a perfect gentleman" during that trip? That he didn't engage in the kind of conduct the snarling mutts of the Fox News Channel like to go on TV and dream up stories about?
Are you able to believe that the trip in question was about AIDS prevention, not about the joys of sexual assault?
Admittedly, AIDS prevention is boring. But are you able to imagine that AIDS prevention is the actual reason why Bill Clinton was on that plane?
"Are you able to believe that Bill Clinton, age 56, actually "liked" this 22-year-old woman, but didn't sexually assault her?
Also, are you able to believe that he "acted like a perfect gentleman" during that trip? That he didn't engage in the kind of conduct the snarling mutts of the Fox News Channel like to go on TV and dream up stories about?
Are you able to believe that the trip in question was about AIDS prevention, not about the joys of sexual assault?
Admittedly, AIDS prevention is boring. But are you able to imagine that AIDS prevention is the actual reason why Bill Clinton was on that plane? "
Then Somerby claims that our culture is not able to care about AIDS, etc. Directing us to reject those beliefs as impossible to believe given the way we ALL are, according to Somerby. Somerby is dealing in double negatives and multiple constructions that deny the simply and straightforward content of Clinton's testimony. People get lost in such constructions. That is why Somerby uses them, because his intent is to damage Clinton, not to believe him.
Any sentient person can read today’s post and see that it is a call for Blue elites to stand up on their hind legs and combat the vicious slander that Fox spews at Clinton. I’m beginning to wonder why you don’t see that. Is someone paying you to pretend to be a liberal and to disrupt Somerby’s call for Blues to confront the Fox propaganda machine?
DeleteThat was me.
DeleteYou seem to be unable to read below the surface and are taking Somerby too literally. Assuming you are reading Somerby in good faith and not just some troll paid to defend him in comments.
DeleteHow do you imagine any "blues" can "confront" the Fox propaganda machine when it is fueled by Republican money that knows exactly why it is doing what it does? And if Somerby is confronting lies, why is he sowing doubt about Clinton's statements and what happened? Somerby says the left has already so tarnished Clinton that no one can believe what he says about his innocence, inviting his readers to mirror his own skepticism. That is an odd sort of defense (or confrontation if you prefer).
Nothing said by "blues" is going to peel off any Fox viewers, not even with a huge effort that would immediately be decried as "biased" should any press outlet attempt it. And there is that old saying that there is no such thing as bad publicity. Even negative reviews of Gutfeld promote him and his show. So how exactly does Somerby think we blues are going to confront Fox?
DeleteOf course that was you, DG. We wouldn't want you to miss getting paid for meeting your troll quota. That's the main reason trolls have nyms -- to identify their efforts so they can get paid properly.
DeleteAnd from yesterday we know why Mice are too scared to use nyms; they want added protection against libel actions. As they said, they will imply Somerby is a pedophile but won’t say it directly for fear of suit.
DeleteIf you stick to the facts of what someone has said previously, quoting them accurately, you don't have to call names. What they are will be obvious from their words. A pedophile is someone who has sex with children (those below legal age of consent). The only person here who knows about Somerby's sex life is Somerby himself, and any partners. It isn't "fear" that keeps me from name-calling of the type that you DG, and other trolls here engage in so freely. It is honesty. Just as I do not state that I know why Somerby writes what he does here. So I deal with the things he says. It is right to be afraid of frivolous libel suits of the type that Trump loves to bring. That is another way to suppress free speech, but it works. I don't see any shame in that so-called fear.
DeleteLibel for a nasty snarky anonymous posts on an unregulated blog. Got it. I better lawyer up as all of MAGA is jaggoffs and weirdos and as such are the type to enjoin in frivolous lawsuits.
DeleteHere is a logical syllogism:
DeleteIf a man is a pedophile, then he will read My Antonia.
Somerby reads My Antonia.
Conclude: Somerby is a pedophile.
No, that is a fallacy. It is called Affirming the Consequent:
"Affirming the consequent is a formal fallacy that incorrectly assumes if a result (consequent) is true, then the cause (antecedent) must also be true. Structured as "If P, then Q. Q. Therefore, P," it invalidly reverses "If P, then Q"."
It is easy to see that the conclusion is wrong by imagining other reasons someone might have for reading My Antonia, such as being an English teacher and preparing a test on it for a class, reading about the book on a webpage and being curious about its contents, and so on. There are many alternative reasons for the behavior observed.
Trolls here who believe that when you say something specific about Somerby's behavior, you must be saying he is a pedophile or a Nazi, are engaging in that mistaken reasoning.
I agree with Bob that Republicans are pieces of shit.
DeleteThank you. Pearls before swine.
DeleteDG is a troll operating in bad faith.
DeleteHere we see Somerby bashing the lone Democrat on The View, by calling Tarlov a "punching bag." That is demeaning to Tarlov, who perhaps feels it is important to represent the left on an otherwise propaganda-filled network. Does Tarlov deserve such a title? Here is her background:
ReplyDelete"Education: Earned a B.A. in History from Bryn Mawr College, followed by a Master of Science in Public Policy and Administration, a Master of Research, and a Ph.D. in Political Science and Government from the London School of Economics and Political Science.
Career: Before her media career, she worked as a democratic strategist and pollster for Schoen Consulting. "
It doesn't seem to be in Somerby's nature to say anything nice about a female journalist or analyst. Tarlov is certainly outnumbered but she is also well-qualified to serve as she does on The View. Others consider that she is doing her job well as the Los Angeles Times describes her: "She is recognized for her ability to articulate progressive viewpoints in a collaborative, often spirited, setting on a conservative-leaning network."
So, why does Somerby dump on her this way? It echoes his ugly behavior toward female journalists, including his long campaign against Rachel Maddow (still one of the left's MVPs). She alone cannot fight the slop served by Fox, but if she were not there, we would have no voice on that network at all. And no one can say she has given up her role. Somerby thinks she is a kind of political straight man, teeing up negative crap from the other hosts. Crickets from Somerby about the liberals who do the same on Bill Maher's show, now that he has come out as a right-winger. Tarlov has a dirty job, but someone has to do it or there would be no counterpoint at all to Fox propaganda. At least she isn't as big a shill as Somerby himself, pretending to be liberal while advancing this crap against Bill Clinton, yet another day.
Somerby never really states what happened on March 3. If that is his sullen reaction to being accused of amplifying Gutfeld's voice, why does he do it again with this Chauntae Davies testimony and interview quotes? Yes, she supports Clinton, even in her prior statements, but why then does Somerby tell us that no one can believe her because we are all too preoccupied with sex to consider any innocent figures. That is ridiculous and negates what she said.
ReplyDeleteIt is completely obvious that the Republicans are deposing the Clintons in order to distract from the guilt of Trump and other major Republicans and public figures, as revealed by the Epstein Files. Those files have still not been released as required by law, something Somerby mocks. Actual liberals are very serious about demands to see those files and prosecute the abusers of Epstein's victims. Somerby's tone and mockery grate on those of us who definitely care about those victims AND AIDS. Somerby's cynicism is ugly and not what the left is about. It undermines his assertion that he is one of us, when it is plainly obvious he is not. HE is the one who doesn't care about AIDS (or other liberal causes) and he generalizes this to all people, when that is plainly untrue. Who does Somerby think has funded the Global Initiative all these years? People like us, as they say on PBS.
Somerby concludes: "In our own Blue America, no one will ever report or discuss what those lowlifes did on March 3. They're very naughty boys and girls, and the giants we Blues are told to trust race to get out of their way."
First, we do not trust the mainstream media or legacy press, because of how they have treated our candidates over time. Second, they are no longer giants but now owned by right-wing oligarchs who are reshaping all of the media into Fox-like propaganda organs. Pete Hegseth said so yesterday, to the press. Third, it is a waste of time to follow and correct the lies told by the right, on media like Fox. Fourth, distracting ourselves from our own investigative journalism is exactly what the right wishes would happen, but there is too much corruption and wrongdoing to waste time chastising Gutfeld for doing exactly what the right pays him to do.
We on the left have our own fish to fry. Today we get another helping of Somerby's own propaganda on behalf of the right, kicking Clinton, kicking Tarlov, kicking a hapless wrestler, and repeating Gutfeld's lies verbatim, in case any of us might have missed them, deliberately in most cases. That is a service to the right, not the left.
Obviously, Somerby was describing her role in the Fox propaganda ecosystem. You use it as pretend evidence of his “sexism.” Again — Are you on the level or are you a saboteur?
ReplyDeleteHe calls a woman with a Ph.D. in politics a "punching bag." Aside from the historical habit of men calling women bags (short for baggage, a term going back in England), he might have commended her effort and noted the clarity or truth of her statements. If Somerby wants blues to confront Fox, why does he denigrate the "blue" already doing that, as Tarlov does? It makes no sense, except in the context of Somerby's ongoing attacks on female journalists.
DeleteCalling her a "punching bag" evokes violence against women, but it also seems to expect that she should be able to stand up against 4 conservatives arrayed against her, permitted to interrupt at will and talk over her. I don't know how she stands it, but those guys are displaying the kind of verbal discriminatory behavior that women in other situations experience. Women are interrupted more, talked over, not listened to, and so on. In that way, Fox displays sexism in action and viewers get a vicarious experience of bashing women themselves by watching what happens to Tarlov.
DeleteThen Somerby piles on, by calling her names instead of honoring her intention and her effort, successful or not. If Somerby had a clue about sexism, he might have noted that dynamic himself, but he is clueless and too often expresses his own sexism with his attacks on women here in his blog.
Yet another reason why Somerby is unlikely to be liberal, no matter what he calls himself.
If you read any of the blue substacks, such as Simon Rosenburg, Robert Reich, Heath Cox Richardson, Thom Hartmann, you can read to the end and not find a single right wing meme or talking point. With Somerby, it is easy to identify when he wrote each day's post -- the right wing talking points leap out and are obvious. That's why no one who is genuinely liberal believes that Somerby is one of us. His purpose is clear because his essays ALWAYS have something beneficial to the right being said each day, and these ideas and statements are so easy to identify.
ReplyDeleteOn a good day Somerby reposts their stupid bullshit and contrasts it with the truth so those unfamiliar can see through their slop.. I thought he did a good job today. Have no idea why he picked a topic nobody but the few uber DTC's- Deranged Trump Cultists give a shit about. Good god they are so weird.
DeleteI don't think it is true that the right damaged Clinton's reputation so severely that no one today can imagine Clinton is innocent of sexual interactions on Epstein's plane. Somerby also said that.
DeleteOK - Prove it. What in today’s post is beneficial to the right? (And let’s make a bet - for every thing you can find I’ll pay you $1; for every thing I can find that’s detrimental to the right, you pay me $1.)
DeleteI have already explained this. Go back and read my complaint about Somerby's post. I quoted the parts where Somerby raises doubts about Clinton's innocence, which I said is his reason for today's essay.
DeleteIt is Somerby's strategy to pretend to complain about Gutfeld, while quoting his jokes, then to switch to his main purpose here, which is complaining about blue America (Democrats). He does that again today. The supposed complaints about the right are window-dressing for his actual purpose which is to malign the left. Somerby routinely furthers the "Democrats in disarray" meme and contributes to the negative attitude toward the Democrats held by Democratic voters. It is part of why Democratic turnout was decreased during the 2024 election, to the point where Trump beat Harris.
There are no genuine Democratic bloggers (liberals) who routinely denigrate their own party the way Somerby does "blue America" and "blue media".
I don't bet and I wouldn't trust you to the point of identifying myself. I'm not a fool.
Here is an interesting article about the so-called societal scourge of prediction markets -- the latest form of betting attracting young men to waste their money.
https://www.publicnotice.co/p/ana-marie-cox-interview-prediction-markets
Damn, that’s really depressing
DeleteSomerby's sexism and right wing agenda are so obvious that at this point denying them just outs you as a right wing troll, and a tediously ineffective one at that.
DeleteHere is how people in blue media confront the Lowlife-in-Chief:
ReplyDelete"— Trump chuckles as he admits Putin is helping Iran kill American troops. It’s a grim reminder of when Putin was paying bounties to Afghan militants to kill our soldiers and, when Trump was confronted about it, he defended Putin and called it a “hoax.” Even though the source of the information was US intelligence agencies and the briefing had come from his own administration. Now Putin’s at it again, this time helping Iran kill at least a dozen US soldiers so far, and Trump actually laughed when asked about it, saying that Putin was just doing what we’re doing to him in Ukraine, so it’s all okay. Here’s how Raw Story reported Trump’s response to Brian Kilmead asking him to confirm that Putin is helping Iranians kill Americans: “Yeah, we’re helping them also,” Trump agreed, chuckling, “and he says that, and China would say the same thing, you know. It’s like, ‘Hey, they do it, and we do it, in all fairness.’ They do it, and we do it.” And then, as six more US airmen died in a plane crash over Iraq in support of our Iran mission, Trump started dancing. Can you imagine the GOP and media response if Obama had — twice — just shrugged his shoulders when he was told Russia was killing Americans and then went partying? This disgusting husk of a man must be impeached as quickly as possible." Thom Hartmann
Horrifying. Right Dickhead?
DeleteTwo Iraqi security officials say a missile struck a helipad inside the U.S. Embassy compound in Baghdad. This comes after US forces executed a large-scale precision strike on Kharg Island, Iran. The strike destroyed naval mine storage facilities, missile storage bunkers, and multiple other military sites.
DeleteWhat does this have to do with Hartmann's quote?
DeleteHartman's quote is about nonsense. I was contrasting the childish trivia with something that actually matters.
DeleteTrump’s mental illness and sociopathy do matter, DiC. A great deal. Just ask , um, Bob Somerby. You know, the blog you comment on every day?
DeleteDickhead is here to distract, divert and deflect. Haven’t you learned that yet?
DeleteI'm sorry @1:41. This talk about mental illness and dementia are obviously bogus for anyone who is paying attention. It really doesn't make sense to focus on a one or two cherry-picked sentences when our President spends so many hour communicating with the public. If you want me to take this seriously, please listen to Trump's complete pressers for the last couple of weeks and get back to me.
Delete@1:48 - are you serious? You think actual war news is a distraction from a single, cherry-picked word or or two? No. The war news is what's important. The distraction goes in the opposite direction.
Right, and Trump's hands are beautiful and everyone walks down a ramp clutching the railing and he never slurs a word except on purpose (I meant to do that!).
DeleteDavid in Cal - Trump says we have eliminated Iran's military except for the missiles and drones keeping the straight un- insurable for tankers. Please explain.
DeleteDavid in Cal, Trump says it is no biggie Russia is helping Iran target our soldiers. We do it too. Then eliminates Russia's oil sanctions earlier levied for their evil invasion of Ukraine. Please explain.
DeleteDavid in Cal, much like Russia's large scale invasion of Ukraine was supposed to be over in days, Trump and his incompetent cronies have also promised a short war that is already a full blown shitshow that will also last many years. Please explain the fucking stupid as only you can as I can't fathom it.
DeleteYou know the answer @4:26. We have eliminated the overwhelming majority of Iran's missiles and drones -- 90% or more. Trump describes this achievement in expansive terms. Call it an exaggeration, if you like, or "Rah-rah leadership."
DeleteIran started with a lot of missiles and drones. Even the remaining 5% or 10% are still doing some damage. And, that's enough to keep ships out of the Hormuz Straight.
IMO Getting up to 100% is a difficult challenge. Many of the missiles are stored underground. Each one must be individually located and then destroy with sufficiently powerful bombs. Drones can be fired anywhere.
I repeat my complaint. There's a reality out there. That's what I am interested in. Trump's precise words, and whether they were a valid exaggeration, does not particularly interest met.
@4:32 - Your comment appears to be a flat out lie. Trump said he didn't know how long this war would take. He offered a guess, not a prediction, on the order of a month or so. At no time did he ever say we would win in 2 1/2 weeks.
DeleteTrump suffers both from frontotemporal dementia and being born stupid David in Cal. The type of dementia where you have most all the words but no impulse control. The stupid is bring back coal, windmills don't work, we won in Iran idiocy. I am still betting the man who destroys everything he touches will kill the earth.
DeleteFlailing is what you are doing you fucking idiot David.
DeleteDavid, Trump already lost. Iran can fuck with the neighbors production and the straight forever, screwing global oil supplies forever, dumbfuck. Russia now makes Iranian designed Shahed drones and can ship to them. China will be happy to fuck with Trump as well. No good options for Trumpty Dummpty but to fall down. War lost at week two. Strategery! Who needs competent military leadership when you have WARFIGHTERS!!!
DeleteIt's bad you know.
DeleteReport: CENTCOM Suggests Trump’s War in Iran Will Likely Last Through September
Recent developments announced by the White House suggest the war will “widen,” one expert says.
David flat out lies yet again today.
DeleteThere has not been a 90% reduction in Iran's missiles and drones. Anybody with rudimentary knowledge of these weapons knows you can not launch a successful attack with your stock at 10%.
David is your typical know-nothing foreign troll, so it is best to ignore him.
Trump's precise words, and whether they were a valid exaggeration, does not particularly interest met.
DeleteYou mean when Orange Chickenshit looked the American people in the eye and claimed Iran delivered a tomahawk missile to the girls school and Leavitt explained that he is entitled to his own opinion ?
My God you people are fucking freaks.
Shhh, leave dic alone. He’s admitting that Trump is full of shit. Somehow, that’s not supposed to matter.
DeleteI don't listen to what Trump says. I watch him treat Republican voters like the morons they are, which tells me Trump is all there mentally, because only someone who is sane would treat Republican voters like the morons they are.
DeleteSomerby’s consistent theme for well over a quarter of a century is a call for Blue elites to confront and combat the firehose of propaganda spouting from the right-wing noise machine headed by Fox News. He despairs whether this will ever occur. I’m beginning to wonder whether the slappers are sent here to disrupt his message.
ReplyDeleteI like to slap a fanny after it burps. And leave a nice red hand print if you know what I mean.
DeleteHe also attacks liberals, DG, and has since 2015. Just fyi.
DeleteWhy can’t right wingers stop the lies and propaganda? Is it the blues’ fault?
DeleteIt's not "Why *can't,"* it's "Why *don’t* right wingers stop the lies and propaganda?"
DeleteAnd Somerby's answer is that it's because Blue elites are too scared to confront and combat the lies and propaganda.
That makes no sense at all.
DeleteThe question is why don't Blue elites stop right wing propaganda; the answer Somerby gives is Blue elites are too scared; and you don't understand? That tells us something about your reading comprehension abilities, doesn't it?
DeleteThat is the silliest explanation I have ever heard. I dare you, I double dog dare you, you're scared, you're a pussy, am not, am too, your momma. No your momma. No wonder Somerby calls his pretend enemies children. You trolls are children. You think in terms of who's brave and who is chicken, when this is about who has the money to buy media outlets and who represents the people and thus is relatively less well-funded. You have to be the silliest troll on earth.
DeleteWe blues take care of our own media, which is NOT the legacy media Somerby refers to. We do fine with getting our message out to those receptive to it. That doesn't include you (obviously) or the right wingers who watch Fox News compulsively, or Somerby. He doesn't read the right people and he mislabels them as "blue" when they are "red" and that is why he is so ridiculous and confused here. Poor old fart.
The notion that Dems are not fighting to stop Republican propaganda is so silly it is hard to believe a sentient adult wrote such nonsense.
DeleteSomerby has never offered any shred of credible, coherent evidence to support his moronic thesis.
Furthermore, data demonstrates that in the last election, the majority of those that follow corporate media, both closely and even moderately, voted for Harris.
So, no, there is nothing to Somerby's stupid thesis.
And the right wing trolls, like DG, know this, they are not here in good faith.
Trump's precise words, and whether they were a valid exaggeration, does not particularly interest met.
DeleteYou mean when Orange Chickenshit looked the American people in the eye and claimed Iran delivered a tomahawk missile to the girls school and Leavitt explained that he is entitled to his own opinion ?
My God you people are fucking freakish fascists.
"Somerby has never offered any shred of credible, coherent evidence to support his moronic thesis."
DeleteAssuming that what you say is true (I don't, but let's assume anyway), why do you come back here every day to read his moronic, evidence-free thesis?
To read the comments, obviously. Fuck off troll.
DeleteAnd we'll all find your comments especially edifying.
DeleteSomerby's main point about us blues just letting the 2nd Amendment lie there, while Republicans continue to beg for us to use it on them, is what keeps me coming back to TDH.
Delete"No one will ever ask the children why they did what they did.
ReplyDeleteAlso, no one will ever report or discuss the remarkable fact that these very bad boys and girls went on TV and did it!
We refer to the way the children behaved on Tuesday, March 3—first on The Five, then five hours later on Gutfeld! In fairness, they behave like clowns every day of the week, but their behavior this day was remarkable, even for them.
Even for pigeons like "Tyrus" and Timpf! They're two of the very naughty youngsters to whom we make reference this day."
This is odd language for a former teacher who worked with children daily. Most teachers respect children, recognizing that they are people who will become good decent adults with guidance. Somerby's use of "child" as his favorite derogatory term is thus odd for a man who used to teach children.
Children do misbehave, but when Somerby describes the lying and mean-spirited jokes and bigotry, he minimizes that stuff by applying the term child to the perps. This is not ignorant or innocent or even rebellious on the part of these Fox participants. There are far better words to describe what they do as they spread propaganda in support of right wing objectives, at the behest of their billionaire owners.
Using the label child not only minimizes what they do, but implies less fault than an adult would be accorded. But Gutfeld and the others are guilty of choosing to do what they do, and it is harmful both to society and to the viewers, not to mention all who are harmed by Trump's actions and the right wing agenda (ICE, these new wars, Doge, climate change natural disasters, lack of vaccines, wrecking of national heritage sites, and so on). We give slack to children, but these adult miscreants deserve to be held accountable, as Lord Hawhaw and Tokyo Rose were.
By calling these assholes children, Somerby lets them off the hook and signals to his audience that he is not serious in his complaints about them. Calling an actual clown "a clown" is not much of an insult. Somerby reserves his real language for the blues:
"We live in a smarmy, unintelligent, failing culture which has only one thing on its mind.
Our culture doesn't much care about saving lives around the world. Instead, our culture enjoys the lurid dreams voiced by Gutfeld and Timpf and the rest of the mutts on Tuesday evening, March 3. "
So, our culture is sex-obsessed but Gutfeld and his crew are children? But they are providing the fodder our depraved culture demands?
But the bottom line is that we blues refuse to rescue Somerby from his sex-addled smarmy culture, never mind that it is Somerby himself who turns on these shows day after day, as he ignores the actual blue media in order to immerse himself in Gutfeld's smut.
Given that Somerby's exhortations to blue America make no sense, why does he blame us day after day for the lies told by the right wing?
"...why they behaved as they did: No one will ever ask the children why they did what they did.
DeleteAlso, no one will ever report or discuss the remarkable fact that these very bad boys and girls went on TV and did it!"
Those scamps! Those rascals!
This boys will be boys attitude is how Trump got elected. He gets away with telling people what he thinks, with no consequences. Gutfeld is Trump. That wrestler is Hegseth. Tarlov is the mommy who must be disobeyed and humiliated, confronted (as DG says) to show manliness.
Are men in our society so weak, so insecure about their manhood, that they would put a tyrant in power simply so that they can identify with him as he knocks down the blocks and leaves the toys scattered on the floor while boasting about his strength?
DG has it right when he talks about lack of courage, but he is applying the term to the wrong cohort. These guys think in terms of strength but mistake the signs of it, accepting bravado, bragging, chugging and swearing for actual manhood. There is no real manhood on the right because the party attracts the weak. Real men vote Democratic. Look at the courage shown by Bill and Hillary Clinton, by Biden, under the attacks on them by a right wing that lacks any restraint! I admire that, not childish posturing.
"Are men in our society so weak, so insecure about their manhood, that they would put a tyrant in power simply so that they can identify with him as he knocks down the blocks and leaves the toys scattered on the floor while boasting about his strength?"
DeleteFor those who don't understand what a rhetorical question is, 2:59 provided a perfect representation of one , above.
"why does he blame us day after day for the lies told by the right wing?"
ReplyDeleteI'll try one more time, then I'm done. Somerby doesn't blame Blues for the lies told by the right. He blames Blue elites for being too scared to confront and rebut those lies.
Why will you not accept that Somerby is wrong about this? Blue media have been effectively confronting and rebutting right wing lies, to the best of our ability. We do it in actual blue media, not the legacy and mainstream media Somerby continues to call blue when they are now owned by right wing oligarchs and are now spewing propaganda.
DeleteNote that the term "elite" is negative in Somerby's vocabulary. He is anti-intellectual and disparages education and knowledge, expertise and experience, just as the right wing does. Note also that when Tarlov attempts to confront her colleagues, Somerby demeans her. How sincere is he really about blues confronting the right when he won't support those doing it?
How scared are we blues when we are organizing protests and forming observer groups to follow ICE around and take pictures, getting shot in the face for our efforts. Calling blues cowardly is as unfair as saying we don't oppose right wing propaganda. How exactly are we blues supposed to gain our own show on Fox to use as a podium?
But the word is getting out. That is why Republicans are switching their party affiliations and voting blue all over the country, including in deep red states and districts.
"Why will you not accept that Somerby is wrong about this?"
DeleteBecause he has spent years, decades even, documenting the failure of Blue elites to even acknowledge the propaganda that spews routinely from Fox and similar outlets. Like today -- liberal women are held up as cows. Think any serious media outlet or Dem politician will report and condemn this outrage?
So, Dogface, you think the job of blue media is to complain about Gutfeld? What do they actually report on? Do you even know?
DeleteNo one on the left believes Rosie is a cow. We don't need to be convinced of that. It is a waste of time to focus on the misgyny of the right when that is part of what defines them.
DG are you going to pretend you are unaware there are media outlets solely dedicated to covering Fox News from the perspective that Fox News operates as the propaganda wing of the Republican Party?
DeleteBrother, please.
When Bob writes his poorly thought out posts about Fox News, he often is basing it on reporting from major news outlets.
What a dopey troll.
5:18 -- Everybody knows that there are tons of obscure outlets dedicated to everything under the sun, including exposing Fox propaganda. But they have little or no effect because they are obscure. Somerby's complaint is that the Blue elites (media and pols) run and hide from Fox. Surely you understand that, right?
DeleteThere is nothing obscure about Media Matters or Right Wing Watch. The right doesn't read them, but then we don't read right wing blogs either. It doesn't mean they are obscure or that they have no effect. My favorite is Tiedrich, because he is humorous and includes actual video. A couple of the candidates aiming to run for president in 2028 have appeared on Fox. Is that running or is it hiding -- not sure.
DeleteRight Wing Watch: 47,000 subscribers
DeleteNew York Times: 12,700,000 subscribers
I cancelled my subscription to the NY Times when they were slagging Biden, so it is one fewer now. Troll.
DeleteI canceled my subscription to the Times over their obsession with attacking President Clinton over Whitewater
DeleteI canceled my subscription to the Times, because they are a Right-wing rat-fucking machine, and I already can get that for free at TDH.
DeleteI'm beginning to think DG is a child. He thinks we blues are a bunch of pussies, too cowardly to rebut Republican lies. That sounds like a double-dog dare to me! Who engages in daring people and silly bets. Boys. Young boys. That would explain a lot about his inability to see what Somerby is really saying. Of course, it would also preclude him being a lawyer or a Democrat (since he is probably too young to vote), as he has previously claimed. I would rather call him a child than an idiot, but then there is the matter of his ongoing assholery. Can't do much about that.
ReplyDeletePerhaps you might want to get to your lectern so you can give me another lecture about name-calling and civility.
DeleteYou don't get to confuse one anonymous with another. Deal with what the person in front of you has said. You called blues cowards. I am confronting and rebutting that statement. If you don't like, go away.
Delete"You don't get to confuse one anonymous with another."
DeleteActually, you're the one who is hiding among the mass of anons, because there's no way to tell one from another. But that's a separate complaint that I've often voiced.
And, BTW, I was addressing you: You called me a "child," a "boy," an "idiot," and an "asshole." I have no interest in further interacting with you in any way.
DeleteAnd the only reason I will in the future is because you're an anon and I won't know that you're the one who serially insults me like this.
DeleteYou frame this as people hiding from you when you are the one who is incapable of addressing the content in anyone else's comments. You are an idiot child. Storm off in a huff. That is as immature as everything else you do here.
DeleteBwahahahahahahaha!!!!!
Delete"I have no interest in further interacting with you in any way"
Seconds later: "And the only reason I will in the future..."
Too funny.
I think there is credence to the notion DG is not an adult.
While Somerby attacks a blue media that no longer exists, Trump has been bragging about how he has reshaped the legacy media:
ReplyDelete"Then, at 11:02 a.m., Trump posted a busy graphic showing how “President Trump is reshaping the media.”
The post touts the fall of legacy media by pointing out the outlets and media personalities who are now “gone” under his watch.
They include, “PBS defunded, NPR defunded, Terry Moran out at ABC, Joy Reid out at MSNBC, Lester Holt out at NBC, Washington Post massive layoffs, [Stephen] Colbert Leaving CBS, Meta’s No More Biased ‘fact checking,’ Chuck Todd out at NBC, Big Decline in MSM Ratings, Jim Acosta out at CNN, and John Dickerson out at CBS.”
Trump gave himself credit for all of those changes.
https://www.mediaite.com/media/news/donald-trump-ups-his-attacks-on-the-press-and-brags-about-destroying-legacy-media/
Somerby supposedly reads Mediaite. Why doesn't he know about these changes?
The very first comment to yesterday morning's report started out like this:
ReplyDelete"Clinton was not part of Epstein's sex trafficking ring. But today Somerby hints he was involved with a 22 year old who was one of Epstein's victims. The implication is that Clinton victimized her too, while giving a deposition that denied such acts. Somerby is scum when he implies that Clinton behaved like Epstein, without giving any support for this statement. This is why I hate Somerby and consider him a bad person."
With today's post, we see that our Bobslapper took three swings at his target and whiffed.
Strike three, Nonny. You're out!
There was no reason for Somerby to tease the deposition and interview by Davies the way he did. Davies is a real person with a life, not part of some game that Somerby is playing.
DeleteHe didn't hint and he didn't imply as claimed. These fabrications were used to justify a hatred of an "evil person." Today we can see plainly the role that hatred played in interpreting--misinterpreting--yesterday's post. The comment was wrong broadly as well as in the details.
DeleteWhy can't you just admit it? You were dead wrong when you told us that Somerby was a "scum" for suggesting that Clinton had victimized Davies. In fact, Somerby was in the process of debunking this very slander. Honest people who make mistakes don't double-down, they straight-forwardly admit the mistake.
DeleteHis hinting without telling us anything is what implied Clinton had victimized Davies. That didn't change just because he revealed that she supported Clinton's claims today. Somerby still hinting and implied that neither should be believed because no one thinks Clinton is innocent in the light of his previous damaged reputation, and because our society is so sex-obsessed. Somerby didn't clear either of them today. He still implies that no one can believe Clinton or Davies, when their stories support each other independently.
DeleteI didn't make a mistake. I waited for Somerby to explain himself after he slimed them both with his hints, and then again by saying that no one thinks Clinton is innocent because of how scummy our society is.
Somerby is an evil man and he is dishonest. He is twisted and he deserves everything I said about him. You do not dictate my opinions of Somerby nor do you dictate Clinton's guilt or innocence (nor does Somerby). Somerby's indirectness is deliberate so that he can play things all ways at once. So that he can slime Clinton while barely telling the truth about the Epstein testimony. His attempt to slime Davies, while withholding what she said and implying that Clinton was guilty of something with her, stinks.
So do you DG.
Quaker, sorry I got involved. I seem to drag a horde of slappers behind me wherever I go.
DeleteTroll
Delete'I didn't make a mistake. I waited for Somerby to explain himself after he slimed them both with his hints,"
DeleteNo, you didn't wait. You posted the very first comment after Friday morning's post, putting your own twisted interpretation onto an anodyne description of the subject to come.
You waited?
You didn't.
If you can't see that Somerby is intimating that it's long past time for us blues to take up arms against the Right, you might want to learn how to read between the lines.
Delete"Tomorrow, we'll show you something that's massively better—something involving President Clinton and one of Jeffrey Epstein's survivors. (She was 22 at the time.) "
DeleteHow is this not hinting? He doesn't say directly what he means about Clinton and the survivor at all. Why does he dangle this tease until Saturday? He leaves it to imagination in the context of Gutfeld's claim that he was enjoying his memories of lewd activities. How is this fair to Clinton? This is innuendo.
Quaker is trolling. The commenter waited to determine the nature of the relationship between Clinton and the Epstein survivor, not assuming anything about it, but did not wait to complain about Somerby's obscure reference to it, which allowed readers to make such assumptions depending on their support or animosity toward Clinton. That was both typical of Somerby and wrongful treatment of both Clinton and the Epstein survivor. There was no need for Somerby to do that.
DeleteThere is also no reason for Quaker to be baiting other commenters instead of focusing on the topics under discussion. Is Quaker autistic that he cannot see what the commenter was saying but focuses so narrowly on what the waiting concerned? Or does he just enjoy jerking people around. Either way, it has nothing to do with civil discourse.
You ask whether Quaker is "autistic" in the same paragraph where you lecture us about "civil discourse"?
DeleteTroll.
DeleteQuaker has been around for longer than 2022. His blogger profile lists that date. I suspect that the original Quaker stopped commenting here and some other person took over the profile after he left (2022). There is a dramatic difference in the kinds of things being written by Quaker now and the way he used to comment. Now he has joined the other Somerby defenders.
ReplyDeleteThe original Quaker was the person who looked up the research about MS retention policies and quoted the study showing that retention did not produce the improvements in reading because it had been in effect for 20 years. That is what changed Kevin Drum's mind about Somerby's criticism of the improvement on NAEP. Somerby never changed his views, but he did say recently that he was in the hospital with a shoulder problem during that time period.
The new Quaker joined DG and Cecelia in mocking other commenters. He's a nasty customer who no longer says anything substantive on any topic. He just trolls. I am sorry to see the other Quaker go.
It is a lie that Somerby did no hinting about Davies and Clinton when he was teasing his upcoming essay, talking about Clinton's relationship with an Epstein survivor without mentioning names or making it clear that he did nothing sexual with that survivor. The is similar to the way he said nothing about what happened on March 3 in his essay, leaving readers to guess or look it up, but implying it was something heinous by the language he used to refer to what happened. As I've said before, this isn't cute. It is an abuse of his readers and who knows why it is done. Somerby could be as batshit as Trump himself for all we know. When people are involved (as Davies and Clinton were), it is wrong to play such games.
If Quaker and DG cannot see that, I suspect it is due to a lack of empathy, or because it conflicts with their real purpose here. Somerby says people don't care about AIDS, but Quaker and DG don't care about truth. They care about who they hurt, and about suppressing Democratic dialog here in these comments by diverting talk into name-calling and assholery. On a normal blog, comments would be moderated and right wing trolls would be eliminated if they didn't stay on topic. These guys topic now is slagging other commenters. It is all they know how to do.
Yup, Quaker lost his credibility here.
DeleteAs someone who grew up in a Quaker community, I am very skeptical this guy is a Quaker, Quakers do not talk the way he has been doing lately.
This strongly points to these Somerby defenders as being foreign trolls. We know there are well financed organizations that try to choke off discourse with these trolls.
This then suggests we do not waste time responding to them when they try to trigger us. If you must respond just label them as a troll and move on. Here are the trolls on this blog, feel free to add if anyone was missed: AC/MA, David in Cal, DG, Cecelia, Mao, and apparently now Quaker.
Quaker? More like Quacker in a basement.
Delete"This then suggests we do not waste time responding to them when they try to trigger us."
DeleteI second this suggestion.
As best I can tell, the slappers feel there are two groups of commenters: Trolls paid by Putin, who tend to use nyms; and the true liberals who are Nonny Moose. But the Noony Moose liberals recognize that Somerby is also a troll paid by Putin. So, here's my suggestion to the Moose: If you all left, there wouldn't be anyone here except Putin trolls, who wouldn't be influencing anyone, so Putin would be shelling out for nothing.
DeleteSo, in a way, you're the problem: Putin is paying me and New Quaker and the others to trigger you; you get triggered; and Putin laughs. So it's like War Games -- the winning move is not to play!
Who would oppose right wing propaganda? Not you, troll.
DeleteSomerby keeps pointing out that white people are lazy pieces of shit--who won't even insult Gutfeld---and Anonymouses still come here calling him a Right-winger.
DeleteSo, the "new" Quaker is a "nasty customer" who "trolls" and "lies," "lacks empathy," has some nebulous, secret "real purpose," and doesn't care about "truth," but only cares about whom he "hurts" and about "suppressing Democratic dialog" through "name-calling" and "assholery." (BTW, I like that last one.)
ReplyDeleteBut you're not "slagging other commenters" here. No, you wouldn't do that. Nice to know.
Troll.
DeleteAn overlooked interview from 2/28:
ReplyDelete'Oman’s foreign minister says Iran agreed to “zero enriched uranium stockpiling.”
Within hours, Israel and the USA attacked them.'
https://x.com/adamscochran/status/2028110216013705445
The wacko missile tossing supplier of weapons to terrorists regime sincerely believes nuclear weapons are inconsistent with the Muslim faith. Go figure.
Delete"DamnYankeesLGM quotes this extraordinarily precise analysis [of Trump's moral failings] from Virginia Heffernen:
ReplyDeleteThe president is not a moral figure in any idiom, any land, any culture, any subculture. I’m not talking about the liberal enlightenment that would make him want the country to take care of the poor and sick. I mean he has no Republican values either. He has no honor among thieves, no cosa nostra loyalty, no Southern code against cheating or lying, none of the openness of New York, rectitude of Boston, expressiveness and kindness of California, no evangelical family values, no Protestant work ethic. No Catholic moral seriousness, no sense of contrition or gratitude. No Jewish moral and intellectual precision, sense of history. He doesn’t care about the life of the mind OR the life of the senses. He is not mandarin, not committed to inquiry or justice, not hospitable. He is not proper. He is not a bon vivant who loves to eat, drink, laugh. There’s nothing he would die for — not American values, obviously, but not the land of Russia or his wife or young son. He has some hollow success creeds from Norman Vincent Peale, but Peale was obsessed with fair-dealing and a Presbyterian pastor; Trump has no fairness or piety. He’s not sentimental; no affection for dogs or babies. No love for mothers, “the common man,” veterans. He has no sense of military valor, and is openly a coward about war. He would have sorely lacked the pagan beauty and capacity to fight required in ancient Greece. He doesn’t care about his wife or wives; he is a philanderer but he’s not a romantic hero with great love for women and sex. He commands loyalty and labor from his children not because he loves them, even; he seems almost to hate them — and if one of them slipped it would be terrifying. He does no philanthropy. He doesn’t — in a more secular key — even seem to have a sense of his enlightened self-interest enough to shake Angela Merkel’s hand. Doesn’t even affect a love for the arts, like most rich New Yorkers. He doesn’t live and die by aesthetics and health practices like some fascists; he’s very ugly and barely mammalian.
Am I missing an obscure moral system to which he so much as nods? Also are there other people, living or dead, like him?"
He’s an abomination. Most parents would not tolerate his behavior in their pre-k children. A permanent stain on this country
Delete"A Trump-friendly right-wing podcaster is furious with the president over the Iran war.
ReplyDeleteComedian Tim Dillon, an influencer with a wide male fanbase who advocated hard for President Donald Trump during the election but has grown more critical of the president in recent months, weighed in on the Iran issue in a recent podcast.
Specifically, the "manosphere" influencer said of Trump, "He's at the end of his life. He's endorsing Jake Paul for president. He doesn't care about what happens next. That's the thing with Donald Trump, he doesn't really care about what happens next…Trump is just kind of on a farewell tour."
He went on to beg Trump insiders to tell the president anything they need to tell him in order to get him to halt the sprawling war.
"Tell him that!" he said. "Whatever this dude needs to hear, so that he can get us the f--- out of there." [Rawstory]
"He doesn't care about what happens next." What a bizarre accusation. If he didn't are what happens nex, he would have left Iran alone.
DeleteTrump's attack on Iran risks his program, his midterm election results, and his long-term reputation -- all because he cares so much about what happens next. He believes that the long term results of Iranian nukes. He may be wrong, but he obviously care very much.
What program, dickface? Kissing Putin’s ass? Xscrewing Ukraine? Fu king us over with his unconstitutional tariffs? Continuing his obscene vindictive abuse of the DOJ to persecute people he hates like Jerome Powell? Fuck you, dickhead fascist freak.
DeleteI forgot to mention the main part of his program, raking in corrupt billions for himself and his fu king crime family.
DeleteAlso too you forgot bankrupt the country, trash the dollar, and destroy socialized retirement, healthcare, research, USAID, and anything good about this country. There will be money for endless wars.
DeleteSo David when does this become troublesome for you? The felon said we won, and it was over in the first hour really. Week three now and all is going to shit. So you get nervous in a month? How about three months. Nope, you are a hopeless shit for brains who will be rooting for this war forever. The idiots formerly warning us about Kamala the hawk and how wonderful Donnie the dove is.You people are ridiculous.
DeleteDavid in Cal even you can't deny this idiot lying President only cares about three things: remodeling the White House and Kennedy Center, and getting paid to slap his name on buildings. Fucking weird. Also too, who else would paste his name over others? Fucking creep to boot, right?
Delete"So David when does this become troublesome for you?"
DeleteWhen Trump is so far gone, he pats a black boy on the head and wishes him well in life.
Out of everything said here today, this is my very favorite:
ReplyDelete"You don't get to confuse one anonymous with another."
Troll
DeleteIf Somerby were mentally competent, he might discuss this, from Media Matters:
ReplyDelete"A new Media Matters report confirms what many of us have suspected for years: the right absolutely dominates online media. And it’s not even close.
According to their analysis, nine of the top ten online shows are right-leaning, with a total following of more than 197 million subscribers and viewers across platforms. The only left-leaning show to crack the top ten? Trevor Noah’s “What Now?” with 21.1 million followers.
Overall, right-leaning online shows have amassed nearly 481 million followers across platforms — almost five times more than the 104 million followers for left-leaning shows. On YouTube alone, right-wing channels have racked up 65 billion views compared to 31.5 billion for left-leaning content.
These numbers are staggering, but they’re not an accident. They’re the result of a deliberate, well-funded strategy to colonize the digital media landscape with conservative voices. While left-leaning creators struggle to cobble together sustainable business models through Patreon donations and merchandise sales, right-wing personalities are frequently backed by billionaire money that allows them to build sophisticated media operations with professional production values and massive marketing budgets.
A MediaMatters chart showing the total following of top right-leaning and left-leaning online shows. From a study of 320 online shows with right-leaning or left-leaning ideological bent. Each circle represents a show with a total following more than 1 million, with circle size proportional to total following as determined with subscriber and follower data collected on February 3, 2025, from Youtube, Spotify, Rumble, Twitch, Kick, Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok. Joe Rogan has by far the highest audience at 39.9 million, with four other right-leaning shows (Ben Shapiro, Russell Brand, Jordan B. Peterson, Theo Von) holding audiences between 22.3-25 million. The only left-leaning show with an audience above 20 million is Trevor Noah's at 21.2 million; the next closest are The Young Turks at 12 million and The Breakfast Club at 11.4 million.
This isn’t just about politics — it’s about money, power, and the future of our information ecosystem.
The Kochs, the Mercers, the Thiels, the Murdochs, the Uihleins — these aren’t just wealthy families; they’re kingmakers who understand that investing in media is investing in political power.
Take The Daily Wire, co-founded by Ben Shapiro (whose online platforms boast a combined following of 25 million according to the Media Matters study). What began as a modest conservative website has expanded into a multimedia empire producing movies, children’s content, and multiple top-performing podcasts. This growth didn’t happen organically — it was bankrolled by Texas fracking billionaires Dan and Farris Wilks, who reportedly invested $4.7 million to get the company off the ground.
Then there’s Rumble, the “free speech” alternative to YouTube that’s become a haven for right-wing content creators. Peter Thiel, the billionaire venture capitalist and prominent Trump supporter, is among its key investors. And now, right-wing online shows have used the platform to add billions more views to their already enormous reach, according to Media Matters.
Billionaire Elon Musk’s acquisition of Twitter (now X) has also reshaped the digital landscape in favor of right-wing voices. Not only has Musk personally amplified far-right content to his nearly 220 million followers, but he’s also implemented changes to the platform’s algorithm and moderation policies that have benefited right-wing accounts. And let’s not forget his direct payments to right-wing influencers through X’s creator program.
These are just a few examples of how the conservative donor class has systematically built and funded an alternative media ecosystem that now dwarfs progressive online media.
Cont.
DeletePerhaps the most insidious aspect of this takeover is how right-wing content has seeped into supposedly non-political spaces. The Media Matters analysis found that 72% of online shows with an ideological bent that self-identify as non-political are actually right-leaning.
Comedy podcasts like Joe Rogan’s (39.9 million total followers), Theo Von’s (22.3 million), and the Nelk Boys’ “Full Send Podcast” (16.7 million) don’t explicitly brand themselves as political content. Yet they regularly platform right-wing figures and advance conservative narratives under the guise of just having conversations or being politically incorrect.
As Media Matters notes, these 15 right-leaning comedy shows alone account for 117.5 million followers — 20% of the total following across all 320 ideological shows they analyzed. And in the lead-up to the 2024 election, Trump and Vance appeared on six of these comedy shows a total of nine times, generating nearly 120 million views on YouTube.
This infiltration of supposedly non-political spaces works precisely because it doesn’t present itself as political propaganda. It’s just bros talking about life, making jokes, and occasionally hosting a presidential candidate or anti-trans activist. And behind many of these seemingly independent creators? You guessed it — conservative money.
In contrast, progressive online media operates in a funding desert. While right-wing creators enjoy the backing of ideologically motivated billionaires, left-leaning voices must navigate a fragmented landscape of smaller donors, subscriptions, and advertising — all while competing against the right’s well-oiled promotion machine.
Major progressive donors simply haven’t prioritized building a comparable media ecosystem. George Soros, the right’s favorite boogeyman, has primarily focused his giving on policy organizations and civil society groups, not media entities that could counter the Shapiros and Rogans of the world. Similarly, other wealthy liberal donors have directed their resources toward traditional political campaigns, issue advocacy, and established nonprofit journalism rather than investing in the creator economy.
Even when progressive funders do support media, they often impose restrictions and expectations that make it difficult to build large, sustainable audiences. While conservative backers give their content creators freedom to be entertaining, provocative, and commercially viable first, progressive funding often comes with strings attached around messaging, issue focus, and measurable policy impacts.
The approach means left-leaning creators are forced to prioritize substance over style, nuance over engagement, and education over entertainment — all while operating with a fraction of the resources available to their right-wing counterparts."
Driftglass examines how "Democrats in Disarray" stories are manufactured by the New York Times and Politico, while actual disarray on the right is ignored. This is what political analysis of media (and musing on American discourse) are actually carried out, as opposed to Somerby's ongoing propaganda:
ReplyDeletehttps://driftglass.blogspot.com/2026/03/politico-discovers-political-primaries.html
Possible good news
ReplyDeleteIran said Saturday all countries except for the US and Israel may pass through the Strait of Hormuz.
“As a matter of fact, this strait of Hormuz is open,” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said.
If this news is real, it may help to moderate the price of oil.
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2026/03/strait-of-hormuz-open.php
You’re an imbecile, dickface! He said it is closed to his enemies and countries that are supporting his enemies,
DeleteYou fucking trump lickspittle
Did you not see news that countries like France and England are now sending warships to the Persian Gulf you lickspittle imbecile?
DeleteDickface, wonder why orange king forgot to fill up the strategic oil reserves before this unprovoked attack on Iran? Didn’t Israel give him enough time? Fucking fascist lickspittle!
Delete@7:28 Shamefully Joe Biden took oil out of the Strategic Oil Reserve for purely political reasons. He wanted lower gasoline prices at the time of the midterm elections. Then, Biden did not replenish the Strategic oil Reserve.
DeleteYou’re a cretin, dickface.
DeleteYou’re such a despicable fucking LIAR, dickface. You will always be a fucking liar.
DeleteReplenishment Strategy
Following the 2022 drawdowns, the Biden administration implemented a three-part strategy to refill the reserve:
Direct Purchases: Buying crude oil back when prices fell below a certain threshold (initially targeted at $67–$72 per barrel).
Exchange Returns: Receiving oil back from private companies that had previously "borrowed" it during short-term disruptions.
Legislative Solutions: Successfully canceling 140 million barrels of Congressionally mandated sales scheduled for 2024 through 2027 to maintain higher stock levels.
USAFacts
USAFacts
+3
By November 2024, the administration announced it had secured 200 million barrels for replenishment at an average price of $74.75 per barrel.
Shh, leave DiC alone. He’s illustrating that the right’s grasp on facts is nonexistent.
DeleteIt makes David so fucking mad about facts having that liberal bias.
DeleteDiC is busy now rummaging through his favorite media outlets like Powerline for facts to refute 8:19. It will be a minute.
DeleteRegarding the claim that the straight is open, and from the Power line article that DiC cites: "It is only closed to the tankers and ships belong[ing] to our enemies, to those who are attacking us and their allies. Others are free to pass,” Araghchi told MS NOW.
DeleteAnd from this the dumbass otherwise known as DiC posts that the only ships not allowed to pass are US and Israeli. Reading for comprehension is not his thing, apparently.
As unpleasant as the task may be, reading an article that DiC links to is the most surefire way to find a rebuttal of what he states.
DeleteThere is no lie DiC won't tell, if he thinks it will support white supremacy.
DeleteI didn't have to read the link, I watched the interview live on MS NOW, conducted by Ayman Mohyeldin.
DeleteIt is disgusting how DiC comes running here once again trying to prove how brilliant Orange Chickenshit is. How the fuck you find possible good news out of this fucking dumpster fire Orange King lit is bizarre.
But The Orange King just said high cost of gas is good for “us”, right dickhead?
DeleteIt is predictably now time for DiC to pivot with an irrelevant anecdote. Meanwhile, Trump's energy secretary said we should expect gas prices to stay elevated into 2027, irrespective of what happens with this illegal war.
DeleteTODAY'S FUN FACT: Trump's overall approval rating is 28%.
ReplyDeleteWhich is the same percentage of Americans who are functionally illiterate. 😎
Stop reading TDH is as easy as turning the channel when "Gutfeld!" comes on.
ReplyDeleteNote the last sentence.
ReplyDelete“ OK, so the Abraham Accords. Taking down the Venezuelan cartel/dictatorship. Finally a response in the Iran War, the mullahs thought we were stupid and weak, they were right. Now Cuba.
You do get he's basically walking on water. Making every elected hack, bureaucrat and diplomat of the last 40 years or so look like dithering incompetent fools, when they weren't actively and despicably enabling said dictatorships, that is.
Could it all go wrong? Yeah. But for the first time since Ronald Reagan blew up the Soviet Union, someone's trying.
We do get you are a deranged cult monster. The also too demented idiot Ronnie had the sense to only invade fucking Grenada for a weekend excursion, and when we let our guard down and 241 soldiers died in a blast in Lebanon brave heart Ronnie had the sense to run home. You really need to go play in the sewer of right wing hacks where you belong, not anywhere near herre. Moran.
DeleteAble to leap tall buildings in a single bound, bend steel in his bare hands. Except not able to explain why he sent his slumlord grifting son-in-law who promised to stay away from government work after the Saudis gifted him $2 billion
Delete"for the first time since Ronald Reagan blew up the Soviet Union, someone's trying."
DeleteBut of course the relevant question isn't whether someone is 'trying' to solve a problem or not, but whether their 'trying' is helping or hurting. Any school child knows this.
Trying to restore the Soviet Union, dickface ?
Delete“Taking down the Venezuelan cartel/ dictatorship.” Hahahahaha. You lead with that bullshit? Your fact-free world has it that removing Maduro and having him replaced by his party leadership equates with restoring democracy there. F-ing dumbass.
DeleteIn January, Mr. Kushner traveled to Davos, Switzerland, as part of the official U.S. delegation at the World Economic Forum, where he unveiled the Trump administration’s plan for a “New Gaza.”
DeleteWhile at Davos, Kushner also discussed his plans to raise billions in new investments for Affinity in private meetings with international business leaders, two people with knowledge of the conversations said.
As recently as December 2024, Mr. Kushner suggested that he would not seek more money for Affinity during Mr. Trump’s second term. That month, he told the podcaster Patrick O’Shaughnessy that he would “pre-emptively try to avoid any conflicts.”
“We don’t have to raise capital for the next four years,” Mr. Kushner added.
That appears to have changed. In materials provided to potential investors this year and reviewed by The New York Times, Affinity indicated that more than three-quarters of the roughly $5 billion it had raised since its founding had already been spent on investments in companies such as Phoenix Financial, an Israeli insurer, and Revolut, a financial technology start-up.
Of course, dickhead will ignore this, as he regales us with tales of King Orange walking on water
“Could it all go wrong?” Said with as much concern as someone putting a soufflé in the oven. Here is a dose of reality. The tariffs have contributed to the worst job numbers in memory. And been a tax borne inequitably by the middle and lower income earners. In the last year Trump policies have erased 12 out of 30 years left in Medicare part A solvency. Gas price hikes are expected to last well into 2027 irrespective of when this illegal war ends. This will cause inflation. Not may cause inflation.Supply chains are now at high risk for their worst disruption since COViD. Global recession is likely whether this war continues or not. All in the service of Israel ,an apartheid and genocidal country under the leadership of a crook.
Delete1:04. Yep. No wonder the Trump crime family has the US bending over backwards for a crook like Netanyahu. And lying to us about it.
DeleteBut for the first time since Ronald Reagan blew up the Soviet Union, someone's trying.
DeleteMore fractured fairy tales from Dickhead in Cal. He’s referring to this guy; the only president to give missiles to the mullahs.
"A few months ago I told the American people I did not trade arms for hostages... My heart and my best intentions still tell me that is true, but the facts and the evidence tell me it is not". He acknowledged that "what began as a strategic opening to Iran deteriorated in its implementation into trading arms for hostages"
And anyone who questioned the bonesaw crown prince’s 2 billion dollar donation to the Trump crime family: that is a day’s worth of cost for waging a proxy war for Saudis.
Delete"Donald Trump said that the United States may carry out more strikes on Iran’s vital Kharg Island oil export hub “just for fun,” The Guardian reports."
ReplyDeleteWhy is Trump still in office? What is wrong with Congress?
"Los Angeles Times: “Again and again in recent days, Trump and other top officials in his administration — notably Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth — have projected confidence and power in Iran in a coarse and triumphant tone that is unprecedented for U.S. wartime presidents and their Cabinet members…”
ReplyDelete“They have consistently described the war in terms of how hard the U.S. is hitting Iran, rather than why it must do so. They’ve talked of destroying the Iranian navy and air force, wiping out its leadership and making the U.S. ‘more respected’ globally than it has ever been, including by showing no mercy…”
“Missing is the solemnity of past wartime leaders facing dead U.S. soldiers, a recalcitrant enemy and a precarious tactical position, replaced by a message of U.S. mercilessness — of contempt for Iran rather than concern for its civilians or a focus on the American ideals that U.S. presidents have long tried to rally the world around, especially in times of war.”
Why is Trump still in office? What is wrong with Congress?
"President Trump said that he’s not ready to make a deal to end the war with Iran despite the country’s willingness to do so “because the terms aren’t good enough yet,” but declined to say what those terms would be, NBC News reports.
ReplyDeleteSaid Trump: “Iran wants to make a deal, and I don’t want to make it because the terms aren’t good enough yet.”
Why is Trump still in office? What is wrong with Congress?
“Congress” was a quaint concept for our founding fathers. It is only an obstacle for fascism, which is what we have now.
ReplyDeleteTrump has redesigned commemorative coins for the 250 anniversary of our nation, including the dime:
ReplyDelete"Since the late 1700s, the U.S.’s seal has featured an eagle carrying 13 arrows in one talon, to represent the 13 colonies, and an olive branch in the other. The items in each talon were meant to represent the power of war and peace, respectively. The eagle’s head facing toward the olive branch was meant to symbolize America being “a nation of peace.”
But, as some have noticed, the eagle on the new dime is missing the olive branch, prompting comments on Reddit criticizing the design. Others questioned whether it was intentional, referencing the ongoing conflict in the Middle East.
“The design of the new dime long predates Operation Epic Fury and only accentuates how easily a poor design could be misinterpreted or misappropriated,” Frank L. Holt, an emeritus professor of history at the University of Houston who condemned the design, told The Washington Post."
Trump has never been oriented toward peace. He has now attacked 7 nations in the first year of his presidency.
Why is Trump still in office? What is wrong with Congress?
This is not who we are as a nation!