FRIDAY, MARCH 13, 2026
Not with a bang but a poser: "Nothing beside remains."
It's a famous line from "Ozymandias," a famous poem by the famous Shelley about what happens to fame.
Also, about what happens to societal power, and possibly just to societies.
By the end of the sonnet, nothing is left of the greatness enjoyed, long before, by the mighty Ozymandias (the Egyptian pharaoh Ramesses II, 1303 BC – 1213 BC).
"Nothing beside remains," we're told at the end of the offering. "Round the decay / Of that colossal wreck"—in its day, it had been a free-standing statue of the mighty pharaoh—"...The lone and level sands stretch far away."
To our eye, it's a bit like that when we watch what happened last week on The Five. And then again, five hours later, on Gutfeld! (and elsewhere in Red America).
Also, it's a bit like that when we consider the fact that publications like The Atlantic have no plan to discuss the way the very possibility of the American project is being worn away, buried deep in sand.
The numbing stupidity we witnessed last week is (almost) all that remains of the American project (such as it has been). All that remains is that stupidity, enabled by the self-protective silence of Blue America's imitation of a journalistic elite.
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.)
Tomorrow, something much better! Sadly, though, the mugs were clowning hard, and having big fun, on the Fox News Channel last week.
They were having major tribal fun as millions of misled people watched. They were having big fun about a pleasing event—about an event which never happened.
With that, we briefly return to what happened on The Five on Tuesday evening, March 3.
No, Tyrus—and Jesse and Emily! We're sorry, but no! There was no time in his deposition on Friday, February 27 when former president Clinton behaved in the way your corporate owners instructed you to pretend that he had behaved.
It's as we explained in Monday's report—as you can plainly see if you simply look at the line of questioning being pursued in the moments at issue. The questioning at that time actually went like this:
President Clinton and his attorney, Cheryl Mills, had been handed a New York Times article about the many celebrity photos found inside Jeffrey Epstein's squalid Gotham mansion.
As you can see by clicking here, there were many celebrity photos on display inside that broken-souled mansion. There was even a photo of Jeffrey Epstein with the former pope!
Also, there was one photo—let's repeat that rather small number—of Epstein with the former president. There was one such photo on display, among the many others.
During the deposition in question, the chief counsel for the House Oversight Committee had questioned Clinton about that one photo. His line of questioning had been quite inconsequential. It had basically taken things nowhere.
As the chief counsel considered his next line of questioning, Clinton and Mills perused the material they had been given during that line of questioning. They were perusing a copy of the New York Times report about all the celebrity photos—and at that point, the CEO of the Fox News Channel decided to let the mutts out.
In they rushed, tongues exposed, bushy tails a-waggin'! Four nights later, on the Gutfeld! program, the nutty host of that program teased the segment like this:
Up next! Bill's trip down memory lane!
After a commercial break, the strange man began pretending. We're sorry, but the very possibility of the American project can't survive moral and intellectual disorder this vast and this astounding.
"Bill really enjoys the deposition," he soon sang, introducing the segment. Then, as a brief bit of video played, he proceeded to pretend that this is what was happening as Clinton and Mills looked at the material in question.
He was doing a Clinton impression as he behaved this way:
GUTFELD (3/3/26): "I did that one. I did that one! I remember her! She was wild!"
The lid had been pried off the garbage can, as occurs on this primetime "cable news" program most nights.
As we've noted, someone has told this program's host that he had to stop comparing the women of The View to cows and pigs and horses and whales and to generic "livestock." But he's still encouraged to behave in the way he behaved this night—and as his studio audience laughed, the nutcase now turned to one of his panel's halfwits:
GUTFELD: So Mike, that was Clinton flipping through old Epstein pictures, smiling and nodding at the deposition last week. His attorney even had to pull the damn thing away from him! How can you not like him!
[LAUGHTER]
To whom was this disordered man speaking? Let the word go forth to the nations! This was the pig-pile that night:
Gutfeld!: Tuesday, 3/3/26
Tyrus: former professional "wrestler"
Kat Timpf: comedian
Greg Gutfeld: host
Dave Landau: comedian
Mike Benz: Foundation For Freedom Online
So read the list of the helpmates.
As Gutfeld turned to the hapless Benz, he was describing a pleasing event—an event which hadn't happened! Joining the assault on societal possibility, the panelist knew how to play it:
BENZ: Look, it's crazy, because Bill Clinton kind of is what— If Jeffrey Epstein became president, it would be Bill Clinton...They are kind of a perfect fit.
What are the odds that two people like this wouldn't [find each other]? You have like the perfect embodiment.
GUTFELD: He doesn't care, Kat, any more. Look at him! He doesn't care if you think he's an old horn dog. Look at that
AUDIENCE: Laughter
(Returning to his Clinton impression]
"Look at that! Let me see that again!"
Once again, it must be said—nothing like that was actually happening in the videotape that was playing on the Fox News Channel screen. Gutfeld and his gruesome guest were staging a remarkable slander—a remarkable slander which was being performed for millions of misled viewers.
Nothing like that had actually happened! It fell to the horrendous climber Timpf to take us all the way down Frost's "seven levels of the world."
"The lovely shall be choosers," Frost wrote. Horrendously, Timpf made her choice:
TIMPF: Honestly, he is probably the first person ever if the history of depositions who wishes he took a Cialis first.
GUTFELD (stage laughter): Ha ha ha ha ha haaaaa! He also is probably the only one at a deposition who wishes it had gone longer.
AUDIENCE: Laughter
TIMPF: Yeah. Yeah.
GUTFELD [performing Clinton impression]: "Do you have any more pictures?"
TIMPF: Yeah. He was like, "Can I take these home? Can I go to the bathroom for a few minutes? But with these?"
The children were happily playing. Moments later, Timpf even chose to say this:
TIMPF: You know, I'm not sure, but I'm starting to suspect that he might like to have sex with really young women.
GUTFELD: Not underage women, but—what did he say? Underage females! "I will not have sex with underage females." That's what he said.
Needless to say, that isn't something the former president actually said. Meanwhile, it's time for the poser Timpf to just go home and stay there.
Her posing has gone on and on. It's time for the roadshow to stop.
These corporate tools were describing a pleasing set of events—a tribally pleasing set of events which actually hadn't occurred. They were doing so on one of the most watched shows in American "cable news"—on a show whose audience is more than twice the size of the typical primetime MS NOW audience.
Gutfeld now turned to a former "wrestler"—to a news analyst who still had no earthly idea concerning the basics of what had happened four and five days earlier.
He was on the show to discuss news events. Monster truck blowhard that he is, he still didn't have the first f*cking idea concerning what had happened.
First on The Five, then on this show, it was clear that "Tyrus" thought that Bill and Hillary Clinton had been deposed during a single joint session. In fact, Hillary Clinton had been deposed on Thursday, February 26. Her husband was deposed one day later.
"Tyrus" didn't quite know that! Four and five days later, the giant blowhard began faking it hard after Gutfeld said this:
GUTFELD: Tyrus, that was a trip down memory lane.
At that point, the giant blowhard started faking it hard. He pictured a car ride home from a joint deposition—a car ride straight out of an earlier age, an age in which the shrewish wife is constantly banging the henpecked husband upside the poor guy's head.
"Tyrus" routinely paints such pictures on this throwback "cable news" program. At one point on this particular evening, he explained what Bill Clinton would do "if he has any brans in his head."
We're going to let that stupidity sit right there. Please don't ask us to comment.
The giant blowhard went on and on about the shrewish wife of his own inner torments. Finally, let the word go forth to the nations! At long last, the time had come for the male comedian to explain what had occurred!
When Gutfeld threw to the fellow in question, this is what Gutfeld said:
GUTFELD: You know, Dave, this could actually—this is my theory—prove his innocence!
He's looking at these pictures and he's like, "How did I miss this?" He's like looking like, "This wasn't here when I was there! Wait a minute! I never had that! That wasn't even on the menu!"
By "this" and "that," this woman-loathing older man was referring to the various underage females whose enticing photos Clinton was supposedly ogling.
They could have been "on the menu" when Clinton took his trips on Epstein's plane! Regrettably, though, they weren't! That's the way this underdeveloped guy still pictures this realm of two genders.
That was the "theory" this monster threw out. When the comedian took his turn, this is the garbage which started to seep from the Fox News garbage can:
LANDAU: I think he's looking at it like the first time you see a Playboy. He's just so excited he doesn't know what to do.
This world-class numbskull continued from there. Soon he was offering this. Could someone give him a Cialis?
LANDAU: This is actually quite an admission of guilt, if I'm being honest...I don't blame him for going to a sex island. I'm not saying you should go with underage—I'm saying, Hillary!
GUTFELD: Yeah!
LANDAU: I mean, he's been crawling into bed with—I don't think they even share a bed. I'm pretty sure she sleeps in a coffin.
AUDIENCE: Laughter, applause
TYRUS: After that testimony, that coffin was built for him.
This is who, and this is what, these underfed fellows are. We know that they could do much better—but at Fox, they're paid to do this.
By the eternal rules of the game, the time had come to pity Bill Clinton for being married to Hillary Clinton. On this gruesome show, the host never tired of insulting liberal women in their 80s for not being sexy enough.
We've entered the realm of the throwback brigade—the angry men who, for whatever reason, haven't been willing or able to keep up. Now, the comedian had trashed Hillary Clinton—and he had explicitly said that her husband had, in fact, gone to Jeffrey Epstein's "sex island!"
From the start, that claim has been flatly denied. These children are paid not to quit it.
Soon, the children were saying this:
LANDAU: It's bad that he's mouthing their names.
GUTFELD: Yes! Ha ha haaaaa! Oh, that's my favorite video. I could watch this for days—and I will!
We don't doubt that he'll do that! In fairness, we've said many times that he could certainly do much better, and that his employer should be getting him some much-needed help.
At any rate, this is the garbage this "cable news" channel sends out every night. Over at The Atlantic, Jeffrey Goldberg isn't willing to report the fact that this occurs.
The New York Times is also committed to the act of averting its gaze. I our own view, it's hard to believe that a large modern nation can expect to function, to survive, in this way.
With great tribal joy, the island of misfit cable news messenger children had described a tribally pleasing event—an event which hadn't occurred.
Over here in Blue America, this is the dangerous garbage our cowardly lions have chosen to avoid. As with Ozymandias, so too here:
This is the downfall they've chosen
Tomorrow: The Epstein survivor's (beautifully heartfelt) tale.
Though also, a word about lizards
Today Somerby indulges in innuendo, hinting but not saying things directly about Clinton, so the reader must guess:
ReplyDelete"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.) "
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. This kind of coy, flirting with truth, ugly shit that he writes for his own amusement and to advance right wing talking points against Bill Clinton (who does not deserve this political disparagement for the rest of his life).
Today, Somerby repeats for the third time, the supposed leering "enjoyment" of Clinton as he was questioned about Epstein's photos. Somerby does say that this leering never happened, but he also repeats the entire Gutfeld segment so that anyone who missed it yesterday or the day before can enjoy the ugly disparagement of Clinton by Gutfeld. No one defending Clinton would do that. There is no reason to do it that way. That makes Somerby's supposed defense when he says the event never happened, hollow and empty because he is harming Clinton himself in the same way Gutfeld did, using Gutfeld's own words.
Somerby is not helping Clinton when he does this.
Somerby does not tell us who the survivor is, with her "beautifully heartfelt" tale. He just links her to Clinton, without evidence, contradicting his own assertion that Clinton was not connected to Epstein's activities (by his own testimony). Somerby implies that something did happen between that woman and Clinton, after saying that Gutfeld's version did not. We are left with a confused picture of Clinton's testimony -- did he lie or was he not involved, despite Gutfeld's make up scenario? And was the survivor telling a tale (as in a "tall tale" or a fictional story) or recounting her experiences? Words matter.
ReplyDeleteSomerby inserts his stiletto and twists it in Clinton's gut. Gutfeld is not Somerby's target. His jokes are faithfully transcribed. Somerby is aiming for Clinton, which is what right wingers still do, just as they return over and over to Biden who is now out of office. And Rosie, who has a private life and a family she is protecting.
Slappityslappityslap.
DeleteBob
ReplyDeleteGiven your avid viewership of the Five, I hope you are, at least, sticking around for the only political news show worth watching Special Report w/Bret Bairer.
“Avid viewership?” That’s one way to describe what Somerby views as “numbing stupidity” and “ moral and intellectual disorder.” That’s a hell of a lead in to the “ only political news show worth watching.” Bret Bairer [sic] must be proud AF to work for an organization that airs such garbage.
DeleteAnd yet Somerby watches Gutfeld avidly. Go figure!
DeleteArticles where Somerby talked about his pear tree:
ReplyDeleteSATURDAY, MAY 16, 2020
SATURDAY, APRIL 11, 2020:
" It was such a beautiful morning that the pear tree just off our deck made us think of Thoreau.
Our neighbor, who's a very nice person, wants the tree taken down; it sheds leaves into her yard. By way of contrast, we love and admire the way this particular fairly young tree insists on living and growing.
It has virtually consumed our deck, turning it into a tree house. Each morning this week, it has presented more flowers and more leaves."
SATURDAY, JULY 3, 2021
"Early on this July 3 morning, we sat beneath our mighty pear tree. As we did, a squirrel who was breaking the fast showered pear shards down on our heads."
He goes on to describe the squirrel as energy lacking mass. I doubt the squirrel considered his own energy wasted though. Somerby again imposes his own interpretations on someone else's meaning.
Back when Chanel Miller's book about her rape and the trial appeared, Somerby said that if she didn't want to be raped, she shouldn't have been drunk at a frat party. He criticized the press for not mentioning the number of drinks she had drunk and suggested that the university was at fault for not restricting alcohol on campus. He defended Brock Turner, convicted by a jury of rape, as being drunk himself, although not to drunk to be witnessed raping Miller and caught in the act by two Swedish grad students passing by.
ReplyDeleteKate Manne describes an event at Cornell University where frat and sorority members were required to attend a talk given by Miller about her rape and the trial. Manne describes the inattention of the audience, playing on phones instead of listening to Miller:
"I wondered if I was being too harsh, or if these students were merely outliers. I am, after all, the founder of the concept of himpathy—originally in response to all the handwringing about the loss of Turner’s bright future rather than the way his raping Miller derailed her life and changed its course irrevocably. I am hence likely to be sensitive to young men’s inattention to a rape victim telling her story for the benefit of the sorority and fraternity members who comprised the bulk of last night’s audience (while the event was open to the entire Cornell community, 15% of each chapter’s attendance was compulsory). But eventually even Miller, striking in her honesty as well as her composure, said something to the moderator: “You know, this has been my hardest gig, because they didn’t turn down the house lights. I’m not sure how you professors do it, because it’s so hard looking out at this sea of mildly disgruntled faces. I mean, I’m sure you’re all very moved, but…”* Miller smiled. The implication being, it didn’t seem like it, from her perspective.
And not from mine, either. I felt a sense of shame and solidarity and missed opportunity. It’s not necessarily, to be clear, that Cornell students behaved much differently or worse than any other comparable student body. Maybe it’s simply that, due to the vagaries of that auditorium, Miller could see all of the students scrolling on their phones inattentively. But that so many did this is a reminder of a very basic point that I will never get tired of making: we need to listen to women when they offer deeply counter-patriarchal testimony. All the more so when they are as brilliant, wise, and creative as Miller, who described her feeling that the universe assigns us all difficult tasks: hers being, in part, to teach us what it is like to be a rape victim. She described imagining herself as a pair of eyes who had seen terrible things and could now report back on them. Miller spoke movingly too of the way those who were indifferent and unmoved in the aftermath of her assault ultimately caused her even more pain than the assault itself. She was confiding in us the pain of being unheld in the face of severe trauma and simultaneously experiencing yet another instance.
We may know her name. But last night we failed, as a community, to hear her story properly. So often, the problem isn’t not believing women. It’s failing to care about what they have to tell us."
Similarly, Somerby pays no attention to the pain of the victims of Epstein, struggling to tell others what he did to them and why it still hurts years later. Gutfeld thinks it is a joke and Somerby repeats Gutfeld's lack of empathy, while both try to skewer Bill Clinton. Somerby never had any enpathy for Miller. He thinks she should have remained sober if she didn't want to be attacked. That kind of logic can be applied to any crime -- Laken Riley shouldn't have been out jogging if she didn't want to be killed. Etc. Somerby misses that the ongoing failure to listen to Epstein's victims constitutes the revictimization of those girls, now women. That is Somerby's failure and another reason why I dislike him enough to point out his flaws, shared among men like Gutfeld and the right generally. This is not how human beings should behave.
Women should be taught not to be drunk at frat parties. Not teaching them that is not how human beings should behave.
DeleteDoes anybody else wonder whether this Bobslapper’s constant stalking of Somerby is a byproduct of some psychopathology?
DeleteCase in point. Do you believe the men at that party remained sober? They should not be drinking either. But why aren't boys taught not to rape women? Trump was obviously not taught that by his parents or anyone else. Why do we let boys get away with such things? And why do we maintain a "rape culture" that portrays molesting and hurting women as manly behavior when it is so wrong? Why do we sexualize young girls and teens as if they were targets of sexual behavior by men? Men should be taught and our society should portray women as human beings, not Mar a Lago sex objects.
DeleteYou must be aware of Pete Hegseth's attack on his girlfriend? Trump's rape of Ivana? The 27+ other women who have accused Trump of rape? This is the problem, not women who drink alcohol along with men at parties serving alcohol.
The point of Miller's speech to frat and sorority members was exactly the one you make, that women and men should be taught about the dangers of alcoholic abuse at their parties. Why do you think this applies only to women? And why did you miss the point that the men are the ones doing the raping when they drink. Why shouldn't they be the ones who limit their drinking?
Look how DG deflects from the points being earnestly made by the commenter.
DeleteThis commenter has never mentioned violence toward Somerby or anyone else. Yet DG and Quaker introduce the word "slapper" into their defense. No one is slapping anyone else, but it is distasteful to use such a term in a comment thread about abuse of women by men. Is this perhaps a window into how certain men think? Is criticism the same as slapping to them? Do they think this is funny too?
DeleteMen aren't going to be raped at frat parties so can get drunk at frat parties. There is a subset of men who will rape drunk women at frat parties and everywhere else and there always will be a subset of men who will rape women. Drunk women get raped because people tell them they should have a right to get drunk at frat parties.
DeleteI think "Bobslapper" is a funnier and kinder term to describe the cadre of commenters who appear here every day to write multiple long rants telling us that Somerby is "evil" than the ones I would otherwise use, such as "Somerby-hater" or perhaps "Somerby-stalker." Perhaps your view differs.
DeleteThe main question about Somerby is why he would expose himself here day after day when his essays reflect so badly on himself. I think he doesn't care, and that is another reason why I think he is being paid to spread right wing propaganda. A person writing for self expression would not only have real things to say, but would care about how they are being received by others. Somerby doesn't.
DeleteDG is a stalker.
DeleteIf men were sexualized the way women are, they would be raped too. It isn't as if men cannot be raped. Look what happens in prisons.
DeleteThere is a subset of men who rape women, and they are called rapists. We have laws against it and such men go to prison (except for Brock Turner who served only 3 months after a jury convicted him of raping Chanel Miller). Rape is not OK regardless of whether women are drunk, alone, children, drugged, smaller and defenseless, wearing the wrong clothes, riding in an Uber, incarcerated in prison, disabled, poor, unable to protest, etc.
Yes, there are men who are criminals. Instead of defending them, other men should focus on preventing crime by teaching boys that rape is wrong no matter what the circumstances.
I imagined some of these anti Bob screeds take an hour or more to type and thought what the ever loving fuck is wrong with these clowns? Then realized they are just using chatbox, cut, and paste. But even then, what is the point?
Delete@12:49, people read and write at different speeds. You shouldn't assume everyone else is as slow as you might be, if you tried to write something lengthy with ideas in it. It is in your interest to learn to tell the difference between a chatbot (not chatbox) and a person.
DeleteWhat is the point? Truth is worth defending, especially when confusion is being deliberately sown to undermine public faith in our institutions. The right engages in way more propaganda than the left, especially if you count Russian interference on social media. The point is to help people find their way through the garbage that Somerby and Gutfeld both spew so freely. You should think about that. If you don't already see the point of opposing propaganda, then you are yourself in need of help.
ZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
DeleteSomeone who asks a question and then doesn't listen to the answer is not going to learn much. Or maybe you are just infested with flies. Hard to know in cyberspace.
DeleteOnly an asshole like Somerby juxtaposes these two sentences and finds it amusing:
ReplyDelete"Tomorrow: The Epstein survivor's (beautifully heartfelt) tale.
Though also, a word about lizards"
Epstein survivors are not lizards. Neither is Bill Clinton or anyone else. There are no lizard people in reality. There is no reason to have written this. This kind of sly disparagement is why I dislike Somerby, who won't say what he thinks out loud because he knows it is unacceptable to decent people.
That kind of stupidity is why I dislike you. There is no necessary connection being made by Somerby between the two sentences you quote. You're a dope.
DeleteIf you think that, you are an idiot. Somerby gets off on deniability, hinting outrageous things that he denies because he didn't directly say them.
DeleteHow do I know those two sentences are linked? Because of the word "also" when he says "Though also" and then mentios lizards.
mentions -- typo
Delete"Top Trump officials acknowledged to lawmakers during recent classified briefings that they did not plan for the possibility of Iran closing the strait in response to strikes."
ReplyDeleteToo improbable to be true? Not under King Dumb Don.
Not improbable. The US believed that attacking Iran was urgent, to prevent a situation where nuclear weapons were certain. US believed we would surely win this war. Both beliefs were right imo. The US did not have to plan for each possible contingency.
DeleteDavid, you have no idea what anyone was thinking. Why say you do?
Delete@1136 I had every reason to conclude that the government believed that this was the last chance to prevent Irani nukes and that we would easily defeat Iran. The Administration repeatedly said they believed these things.
DeleteBecause the Administration SAID they believed these things.
Delete“The US did not have to plan for each possible contingency.”
DeleteMy high school kid thought there was the possibility that Iran would close the strait of Hormuz.
How fucking stupid is Trump and his assembled team? Instead of war they told the dolt to say incursion. So the dumb fuck starts boasting about his excursion, and nobody corrects the moron so on he goes. Timelines and worst and stupid and such.
DeleteEven a child knows that someone can be thinking one thing while saying something different.
DeleteGiven Iran's size, terrain, and preparation for an Israeli/American attack over the past 45 years; I have never read any attack would be quick, and have read that Iran would shut down the straight to make us stop it. I also read that David in Cal was very happy we obliterated Iran's nuke program 8 months ago. I have every reason to conclude he is an unrelenting fucking jagoff troll.
DeleteAre you claiming that the Iranian government is suicidal and would preemptively use a nuclear weapon (presumably a uranium fission bomb) on the United States of America and Israel, both of whom can blow Iran back to the stone age? Are you fucking really saying that, dickhead?
DeleteThe right wing has been saying that to justify attacking Iran preemptively.
DeleteAgreed 12:36, Trump is a diminished dolt who speaks like a child.
DeleteTLDR David in Cal: I believe the folks who have lied to me for ten fucking years!
DeleteTiedrich says today:
ReplyDelete"yesterday, in recognition of Women’s History Month, the White House released the following statement from Preznit Fuckwit.
“I recognized immediately when I came into the room, I looked down, I said— ’cause I didn’t— read, heh heh, I can’t prepa— if I prepare my speeches, I won’t time to get things done. you know, you ever hear that? yeah, I cannot prepare. so I didn't know who the hell I was speaking to, but I walked in and I saw this beautiful woman with the blonde hair.”
oh my god, you saw a beautiful woman ‘with the blonde hair’? what did you do next, bro? did you have your Tic Tacs ready?
for fuck’s sake, Donny was speaking at an official White House event commemorating Women’s History Month. why is it that this malignant toad can’t go thirty seconds without sounding like the adjudicated rapist he is?"
Pathologizing the victim is one way men (who have been the doctors until very recently) respond to victims who are complaining about their treatment. Women who were feminists in the 19th and early 20th century (recall Frances Farmer) were committed to insane asylums by men for things such as trying to leave abusive husbands, having affairs, refusing to take on their wifely roles, claiming access to their own money, speaking on feminist topics in public and wanting to participate in suffragette activities, taking on men's activities such as studying science or writing books. In other words, opposing the patriarchy and rejecting women's limited roles.
ReplyDeleteWe all have psychological motivations and personalities that are revealed in our behavior. Whether these are pathological or not depends on who is being inconvenience or upset by them. These particular trolls know too little about psychology to do an effective job of analyzing the people they dislike here. Same goes for Somerby who has read next to nothing on the subject and apparently never studied it at Harvard. It is hard to imagine a teacher without any exposure to developmental psychology, but that is why Somerby shouldn't have been a teacher without preparation. Reading the DSM doesn't qualify him to diagnose Trump either, just as these trolls have no idea what they should say to malign others here. Saying that someone has their own psychopathology when that is true of every single person on earth, misses the mark by a mile.
WASHINGTON (AP) — The US economy advanced at a sluggish 0.7% pace in Q4 of 2025, the government says in a big downgrade of first estimate.
ReplyDelete“The U.S. borrowed $50 billion a week for the past five months, the CBO says
ReplyDeleteThe U.S. Treasury’s borrowing showed no signs of slowing as the U.S. headed deeper into fiscal year 2026, with the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reporting that another $1 trillion was added to the federal deficit in the first five months of the year.”
Historically ramping up wars and spending outrageously equals end of the empire. But we have the most billionaires so we are winning.
DeleteYes, and those billionaires must have their tax cuts.
DeleteWe don't know anything about the billionaires in other countries, so we think we have the most. I doubt that is true.
DeleteThere is this magazine called "Forbes" you dolt.
DeleteDo you really believe Forbes has accurate information about foreign billionaires?
DeleteNo, I believe you are a dolt.
Delete"A team of [Forbes] reporters, including those from international editions (e.g., Mexico, Brazil, Poland), uses public data and on-the-ground research, though they may miss individuals with hidden assets or illicitly obtained wealth."
DeleteFor example, Forbes apparently missed Jeffrey Epstein and his connections to Russia, same for Trump and his families intertwined assets in the Middle East now. I doubt Forbes knows all of the assets of the British Royal Family, or Musk's wealth, especially now that he has stolen from the govt using Doge. If you only go by what is public and recorded, you do not know anything about wealth. The absence of info about illegal activities limits Forbes from identifying wealth of cartels, for example. Forbes does not know what the ratio of hidden to public assets might be.
Societies are created by people. That means they don't end until people do. So what the fuck is Somerby talking about:
ReplyDelete"SOCIETAL REMAINS: This is the way a society ends!"
Shelley wrote a sonnet about Ozymandias (the Egyptian pharaoh Ramesses II, 1303 BC – 1213 BC). He described the decay of a monument to a long dead Egyptian king. Does that mean Egyptian society no longer exists? Of course not. Does it mean that if a statue crumbles the society of the people who built it no longer remains? Not necessarily.
Somerby wants to suggest that our own society is crumbling when it is actually just changing, largely due to advances in technology, not sands of time. This vague tone of doom and gloom is a favorite of Somerby's, but it doesn't make much sense because he never relates it to specifics. Today he uses Gutfeld as an example of our society's decay. But haven't the lower classes, the unwashed and uneducated, always had their own forms of entertainment, just as low as the people who watch?
DeleteIt would be nice if Somerby thought about things occasionally instead of just stringing together random quotes and images that have no relation to each other and pretending to be profound, while kicking Dems for ignoring what the right is doing wrong (as if that were true -- we didn't vote for Trump).
society definition: "the aggregate of people living together in a more or less ordered community"
"A society is a group of people who agree to live together and work together. The most important priority to this group is the survival of the individuals in the group. As societies change, the other goals, and the tactics used to accomplish the goal of survival, also change."
How does Somerby imagine the mass of people in our country, much less the planet, is going to disappear? Has he bought the right wing idea that Iran was going to set off all of its nukes at once and destroy the planet? How stupid is he?
Somerby is afraid to contemplate his own mortality so he obsesses over the mortality of civilizations instead. Pity the poor old man. Gutfeld no doubt takes his mind off his own health issues.
DeleteLawrence O’Donnell calls Fox News the Fox propaganda network.
ReplyDelete“as millions of misled people watched.”
ReplyDeleteThey are not being misled; they are being lied to.