SATURDAY, JUNE 13, 2026
What we saw on Fox: Can a modern nation expect to survive an epistemic arrangement like that of our own flailing nation?
We can't say that the answer is yes. At long last, we see a major figure in a major publication discussing this same broken culture. The dual headline above his essay says this:
IDEAS
American Democracy Wasn’t Designed for This
Can our 18th-century institutions survive 21st-century technology?
There you see the double headline above Jeffrey Rosen's essay.
Rosen is very sharp and highly knowledgeable. His piece will appear in the Atlantic's July issue—the issue which will be devoted to ruminations about America 250.
Can our stumblebum nation expect to survive the technology to which Rosen refers? We've been asking that question for a very long time here on this sprawling green campus.
Can our stumblebum nation hope to survive? Right at the start of his essay, Rosen offers this initial description of the (dangerous) technology he himself has in mind:
American Democracy Wasn’t Designed for This
In 1787, after the Founders signed the Constitution in Philadelphia, Alexander Hamilton wrote in “Federalist No. 1” that there was more at stake than the future of a single country. The American experiment would “decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force.”
The Founders were hopeful, in part because the information environment of the late 18th century was favorable to “reflection and choice.” A flourishing newspaper industry kept Americans informed and fostered vigorous debate. But the number of publications was limited—about 100 total in the 13 states—and the authority of editors and writers meant that a free press didn’t turn into a free-for-all. And at a time when nothing traveled faster than a horse or ship, the sheer size of the new country meant that news spread slowly, an obstacle to impulsive public decisions. Given time for deliberation, passions would cool, and elected representatives could focus on the country’s long-term good rather than short-term gratification.
Today, those advantages have disappeared, thanks to a technological revolution the Founders could never have imagined. The internet has turned everyone into a potential publisher, able to instantly spread facts or falsehoods to millions. Most people get information about politics and current events not from newspapers but from social media, which discourages engagement with human beings of different political persuasions. Now the rise of AI is discouraging engagement with any human beings at all; instead, more and more people are forming their views in conversation with a machine that lacks moral sense. As America approaches its 250th anniversary, the biggest question for our democracy is whether a system designed for the communications technologies of the 18th century can survive those of the 21st.
That's the way he starts.
We agree with Rosen's basic presentation. Our current "information environment" surely is, without any question, an invitation for the society, for the nation, to crash and burn.
Without any question, "reflection and choice" are hard to come by given our current arrangements. We agree with that basic presentation, a form of which we've been advancing for a very long time.
Can "our democracy" survive the pernicious effects of our various new technologies? With respect to those technologies, Rosen mentions the internet, and he mentions social media. Playing by prevailing rules, he never mentions cable news or (let's say) the Fox News Channel.
There's a great deal more to be said about Rosen's nuanced article. We expect do so when the Fourth of July draws near.
That said, we couldn't discuss what we saw yesterday, on our own TV screen, without mentioning Rosen's essay. Even as he disappears partisan cable, he takes a first, significant step toward the articulation of an obvious societal danger—one which has already conspired with fate to give us President Trump.
As to what we saw yesterday, let us say this:
Good God!
We refer to what we saw during the full hour of The Five. We also refer to the steady stream of garbage and mental and more squalor we saw a bit later on Gutfeld!
These propaganda programs boast daily audiences which are double and triple the size of MS NOW's daily primetime programs. Can programs like these be survived? To that question, we offer this answer:
Go ahead! Take a good look around!
For a tiny example of what we saw yesterday on The Five, here's part of the way substitute co-host Kat Timpf began her meandering rumination about Hunter Biden's recent appearance on Gavin Newsom's podcast.
Pathetically, that was the second topic under pseudo-discussion this day. On a day when the word "Iran" went unmentioned, this is part of what Timpf said:
TIMPF (6/12/26): Honestly, I prefer Hunter Biden to Gavin Newsom. I do. Like, he's just—
Because it is all out there. It is all out there.
He doesn't— He's never really pretended to be anything but what exactly he is. He's like, "Yeah, I smoked a lot of crack." Like, "Yeah, that's me." ...
And I do think that there is something really endearing about that for people. I think he does have charisma. I think you don't get to sleep with your brother's widow if you don't have charisma. [Yes, she actually said that.]
But I think that people like Gavin Newsom—I just—
He's just icky. He just—he's icky! And he's not like, "Hey yeah, I'm icky."...
WATTERS (serious demeanor): Are you saying that Newsom's ickier than Hunter Biden?
TIMPF: Absolutely I'm saying that. Yes! Absolutely I'm saying—
WATTERS: Wow!
TIMPF: ...I do think that Gavin Newsom, he's smarmy. I'll take a crackhead, recovered especially, over smarmy any day.
WATTERS: Okay.
That's part of what we saw. That's what these corporate lunkheads were "discussing" in the second segment of the nation's most watched "cable news" program, on a day when the word "Iran" came up in exactly none of their pseudo-discussions.
Indeed, every topic was tabloid this day. No serious topic was offered.
In fairness to Timpf, this was a rare guest hosting spot for her on The Five. To a long-time viewer, it was obvious that she was trying to create an assertive persona which would fly on that program, as opposed to the familiar persona she employs on Gutfeld!, where she's a nightly panelist.
That said, the inanity was endless on The Five, where every "discussion" was tabloid. And things got much worse on Gutfeld! last night, where the program's termagant turned propagandist almost seemed to chide Timpf a bit, saying this as he introduced her:
"And today, we expect only eight references to Love Island."
That was a reference to Timpf's earlier performance during the first segment of The Five, in which she went on and on, then on and on, about that lamebrain reality show, with a comparison to The Bachelorette added in by Watters.
That's what these flyweights were talking about, six minutes into our most-watched cable news program. Like everyone else, Rosen steered clear of any such reference, but can a nation survive the sheer inanity—and the steady stream of partisan agitprop—which form the basis of these propaganda programs?
On last night's Gutfeld!, the ugliness of the evening's discussions overtook their sheer stupidity. As we watched Greg Gutfeld and four reliable panelists reveal the interiors of their minds, we wondered what it must be like to walk through life, all day, every day, with that much loathing, and that much squalor, banging around in your head.
The program began where it often does—with the latest gerbil being shoved up [NAME WITHHELD]'s alleged ass while people like Timpf sit and watch. (Also, with the endless gaybaiting of Don Lemon, while Timpf provides her approval.)
The anger and squalor continued from there, pushed along by the termagant host and his four reliable guests, including the bloated blowhard introduced as the former "wrestler."
Writing on a daily basis, it's impossible to capture the moral and intellectual squalor of these corporate propaganda programs. But can a modern nation expect to survive the effects of this endless dysfunction?
In our view, Rosen advances an important idea in his essay for the Atlantic. But all around elite Blue America, the Timpfs and the former "wrestlers," the people like Gutfeld and Watters, are disappeared by the timorous orgs which—or at least so it seems—don't want to wrestle with Fox.
Fox is tribal propaganda too; it's tribal warfare of the dumbest, most undisguised kind. Can a modern nation survive this part of the new technologies?
For reasons only they can explain, people like Rosen won't ask.
Take the Fox News Channel Challenge: Go ahead! Force yourself to watch the full hour of each of yesterday's programs.
One briefly thinks of Wilfred Owen, trudging behind the dying and dead in what was then called The Great War.
Gavin Newsom and Hunter Biden. The Democrats have a deep bench of scumbags to choose from.
ReplyDeleteWhereas the Republican scumbags are all in the starting lineup.
DeleteThe only scandal about Newsom that I've heard of, is that he went to a fancy restaurant with friends during covid. I think that makes him foolish, but not scum.
DeleteWorst thing about Newscum, (many people don't know this, but if you replace the "o" with a "u", and add a " c" you get Newscum instead of Newsom) married that screaming lizard woman (Don Jr.'s ex) who was exiled to Greece by Don Von Shitzhizpantz. Gross me out. Plus he looks like Hicseth with that icky greasy hair...
DeleteGuilfoyle was involved in Democratic politics and was progressive while living in San Francisco. She changed her politics to take advantage of opportunities on Fox and with Trump. While still married to Newsom, she moved to NYC to host a show (Both Sides) on Court TV. She wasn't a screaming lizard during her years with Newsom, but she does seem to have been a political and social opportunist.
DeleteIf you look at a picture of Donald Trump next to his mother, you can see how similar his hair style is to hers. It is Freudian.
Here is what AI says about it:
Delete"The comparison between Donald and his mother, Mary MacLeod Trump, reveals several specific styling and physical traits:
Structure & Shape: In her later years, Mary Trump wore a high, back-combed, bouffant hairstyle that swept upward and back. It heavily mirrors Donald Trump's famous cresting wave, comb-over, and overall structured silhouette.
Color & Tint: Photographs and video interviews of Mary Trump show her sporting hair with the same blonde, golden, or lightly tinted hue favored by Donald Trump.
Mannerisms: Beyond the physical appearance, observers have noted that Donald adopted many of his mother's distinct postures, angles, and head-turning mannerisms.
Showmanship: Pundits and biographers frequently point out that, much like her son, Mary Trump was charismatic, shrewd, and possessed a natural love for showmanship."
And we’re all aware that Newsom is the love child of disgraced evangelist Robert Tilton.
DeleteFuck off
DeleteMake me…
DeleteAre you 12?
DeleteCecelia,
DeleteOkay, but still not as funny as the fact that you vote for child rapists , just because they are bigots.
That one will never not be factual.
Anonymouse 6:26pm, nope, I don’t tell people to f-off.
DeleteAnonymouse 7;21pm, anything to make you laugh…
Delete7:48,
DeleteTry being serious, if you want me to laugh.
Anonymouse 8:54pm, no one can keep a straight face with you.
Delete"Can our 18th-century institutions survive 21st-century technology?"
ReplyDeleteThey asked the same question with regard to 20th century technology when TV entered the picture. We even survived giving former slaves and women the vote, even though everyone predicted they would be too ignorant to cast their votes responsibly. Look how our country kept adding new Western states, one after another, without destroying our democracy!
I don't understand what made Somerby so afraid of change and progress, but he gets hysterical over things that turn out to be challenges (or even improvements) and are not insurmountable problems. We will even survive Trump and his fascist wannabe pedo besties ruining all that is sacred to our nation and we will go forward from that disgrace.
I think America is where the planet is headed. Cooked.
DeleteYou need to spend more time in other countries around the world.
Delete"Our current "information environment" surely is, without any question, an invitation for the society, for the nation, to crash and burn. "
ReplyDeleteSomerby and Rosen both have this wrong. The biggest threat to our nation is billionaire wealth infecting our elections and government services. Those people do not care about anything but accumulating more money, they have no understanding of what Americans need, just the needs of their enterprises, many are narcissists with huge egos that they feed at public expense, and now they are plundering our public resources instead of holding them in trust for the people of our nation. Our most urgent problem as a democracy is reining in the excesses of billionaires and those with less wealth who engage in corruption to become richer.
Blackmailing billionaires into supporting a wealth tax is a Day One job for the next Democratic President.
DeleteOnly 11% of the people in the USA have visited more than 10 countries. About 44% own a passport and most who travel outside the USA have only gone to Mexico or Canada.
DeleteThere is a tradition in Europe and places like Australia for young people to take a gap year before starting college in which they travel the world, low budget and living hand-to-mouth, staying with other young people in youth hostels. They learn a lot about the world and themselves before settling down to education, career and family. The USA has no such tradition, which I think contributes to our xenophobia and misimpressions about people elsewhere.
"The program began where it often does—with the latest gerbil being shoved up [NAME WITHHELD]'s alleged ass while people like Timpf sit and watch."
ReplyDeleteWhy doesn't Somerby defend Richard Gere instead of deleting his name (when everyone knows whose name was omitted)? Richard Gere doesn't care what Gutfeld says about him. This is just more stupid Republican shit and gaybaiting. There is no evidence Richard Gere is gay. Smears like this should not be furthered, the way Somerby does when he repeats the slur and pretends to delete the name, when everyone knows who is being talked about.
AI says:
"The 1990 Fax Hoax: The rumor exploded globally around 1990 alongside the massive success of the movie Pretty Woman. An anonymous prankster circulated fake, official-looking faxes across Hollywood—purportedly from the ASPCA—accusing Gere of animal abuse, which caused the story to go viral before the internet existed.
The Stallone Feud: Richard Gere himself has long suspected that actor Sylvester Stallone was the malicious mastermind behind the rumor. The two men had a famous, real-life feud that began in 1974 on the set of The Lords of Flatbush, where a fight over spilled chicken grease resulted in Gere being fired from the film.
Despite the persistence of the myth, it is entirely false. There has never been a documented medical or police report of anyone engaging in "gerbilling."
And then Somerby slimes Timpf by suggesting that she has some special duty to intervene when Gutfeld is doing his conservative duty. When Timpf tells that joke, the Somerby can malign her for telling it. A person on a panel with other comedians does not automatically assume responsibility for what the others say.
I'll bet Somerby would be fine if all the women walked off Gutfeld's show, because then there would be no women in comedy any more. But it is up to men to police their own speech first, and object to other men if they feel the urge, but women do not need protecting from assholes, and there is no duty for women to protect other women either, much less Richard Gere, who is a famous guy (more than Gutfeld) and can take care of himself.
"But can a modern nation expect to survive the effects of this endless dysfunction?"
ReplyDeleteWe protect speech in our country in order to be able to survive the effects of some people setting themselves as prudes and censors in order to suppress the other people who are telling stupid jokes, or spreading propaganda for their favorite causes, or telling unfunny jokes billed as entertainment without being entertaining. Speech doesn't have to be worthwhile in order to be free in our country.
This is another reason why I do not believe Somerby is any kind of liberal. We on the left value out freedoms and will not try to drive Gutfeld off the air because we disagree with right wing crapola. We defend his right to tell lies, as we do Trump's. But we DO want to see those lies called out and corrected by fact-checking. Oddly, Somerby never does any fact-checking here. If it were left up to Somerby, people would be left with the impression that gerbils somewhere are being seriously abused, when those of us with an ounce of education (who know how big a gerbil is, for example), know how to tell lies from garbage, even when Gutfeld says stuff.
Somerby seems to think that his audiences believe whatever he says, foolish or not. Somerby does not support democracy because he doesn't trust other people to figure out what is true and make good choices when voting. People being people, there will be both bad and good decisions at the polls, but the better decisions will prevail because people are not dumb as rocks, in general, the way Trump and his supporters on the right are. Our democracy works because people are better than Somerby thinks they are. Most of those who aren't, don't vote.
Big King Orange Baby Huey is keeping the tarp up covering the name of the Kennedy Center Memorial
ReplyDeleteBecause fuck you, what are you going to do about it
"Despite its clear ideological leaning, the publication often provides a platform for a wide variety of contrarian and center-right voices on specific cultural and political issues."
ReplyDeleteThe knee-jerk assumption that The Atlantic is a left-leaning or progressive publication is belied by the appearance of annoying and wrong-headed articles that I believe are published to stoke controversy and attract attention, not to seriously discuss issues of interest to left-leaning readers.
There are several Jeffrey Rosens, including one who served in the Trump Administration. This is the one who pretends to be above the fray in politics.
This musing about whether technology null and voids our system of governing might make more sense if our system did not also include a means of changing itself via amendment. It might also make more sense if people were changed by technology, instead of technology being an artefact of culture. We are bound by the characteristics of our species and we invent culture to serve our needs. Culture changes. People abide. Our government is part of culture, and we can modify it to suit our current needs. And that is what happens to the various governments around the world, all changing to suit the societies in which they are implemented.
Somerby reads something like Rosen's essay and nods along because it appeals to his personality. That doesn't make Rosen right at all. And it isn't as if we have any choice about technology evolving and people living in a different context as time passes.
The biggest event upcoming is not Rosen's stupid annversary of our nation. It is global warming. That is going to introduce changes in transportation and communication, shortages of food and water, climate-related migration, and conflicts between previously peaceful nations. We will not have the luxury of electing an asshole as president -- we will need FDR-caliber leaders to deal wth the threats to our survival. Rosen will seem quaint. But the dominant characteristic of humanity is our ability to adapt to changing circumstances. We will meet new challenges or die trying. Esoteric musing about whether the 18th century's philosophers were adequate to new times will seem hopelessly irrelevant.
One of the most annoying features of Somerby's complaints here is his total lack of imagination. I suppose it goes along with narcissism and lack of empathy, but it represents a kind of mental inflexibility that emphatically did not characterize those living in the 18th century.
Who votes for a politician because of his hair?
ReplyDeleteRepublicans.
DeleteIf that were true, why would they elect Trump?
DeleteBecause Trump has managed to dress in drag while also pretending to criticize drag. Thus he appeals to everyone.
DeletePoint taken.
DeleteUnable to manufacture a post-racism narrative out of the minority-majority district issue, Somerby today drops the effort.
ReplyDeletePer usual, Somerby today quotes a center right pundit, Jeffrey Rosen.
Both imagine a world ruled by elite gatekeepers - a common right wing stance. Both are more comfortable with elite individual leaders/cult of personality, style of governance moreso than policy ideas, populism, or ideology - a common right wing stance. Both are severely out of touch with what is going on - a common right wing condition.
Right wing populism leads to authoritarianism. The largest segment of the masses makes a deal with the elites: make sure we have someone to look down on and discriminate against, and we won't care about your corruption and amassing even more wealth at the expense of our wellbeing. Basically, they don't care where they are on the ladder as long as there's someone beneath them whose face they can kick. Populism is what's led to this mess.
Delete"One briefly thinks of Wilfred Owen, trudging behind the dying and dead in what was then called The Great War."
ReplyDeleteI find it offensive when Somerby throws in a reference like this one, without making any attempt to relate it to anything else in his essay. Right before this, he was talking about Gutfeld, who has nothing to do with the subject of this poem or the rest of Owen's work. This is a misuse of a serious and moving poem. Gutfeld and Somerby are not serious. This poem is deeply serious and moving. Owen deserves better and so do our war dead.
lol
Delete“Trump began his second term by handing over the government to Elon Musk and his band of traveling adolescents to make everything more efficient and stop the endless pile up of government debt.”
ReplyDelete“All that efficiency led to one of the highest annual deficits in the history of the United States.The Congressional Budget Office predicts that by the end of FY 2026, the annual deficit will hit $1.9 trillion.”
Not to mention the screwworm re-infestation that hat been eradicated in the 1960s. Time to get the popcorn ready with hurricane season starting.
DeleteFEMA has been decimated in less than two years. Everything the Orange bastard touches turns to shit
DeleteThey want to knock the dollar to the floor. Massive cumulative tax cuts and adding $200 B to ICE and asking to increase military by $500 B. The deficit already exceeds the GDP. All the classic signs of the end of an empire.
DeleteElon Musk is worthy of his trillion bucks. Good on him.
ReplyDeleteSpace X is the biggest scam in history.
DeleteHe would lose all his money on a bet that he could recognize the 17 children he donated his sperm to.
DeleteHappy mamas are just cashing the checks.
DeleteHe isn’t paying for all of them.
DeleteElon Musk deserves every gas station signpost he'll be hanging upside down from.
DeleteDon't even try to argue the point.
Anonymouse 6:26pm, what are two things that Elon and his baby-mamas will never spring for?: Birth control or an abortion.
DeleteAnonymouse 7:38pm, I’d say that’s as likely as Elon having sex with you, but… it is Elon Musk…
DeleteThe Iran situation is puzzling. Trump says there is a deal and it will be signed tomorrow. Iran says there is no deal. Neither side is noted for honesty or precision of language.
ReplyDeleteGo fuck yourself, dickhead
DeleteNice to know that Trump is as trustworthy as the Iranians. Nice work, Trump voters.
DeleteIf Iran says there will be no deal, it doesn't matter what the compulsive liar has to say about it. But that always trustworthy peace broker, Pakistan, says it is going to happen before the markets open on Monday, so if there is money to be made on it rest assured that the Trump crime family has placed their bets.
DeleteTrump isn't nearly as trustworthy as the Iranians. Not only does he lie VASTLY more often, but he flips and flops to such a degree that even when he tells the truth, it seldom means anything, because tomorrow he will probably have a new truth.
DeleteWhat is puzzling is why Dickhead the bigot troll is still shit posting about untrustworthy Iran with fuckhead dear poopy leader announcing peace is on the cum over 50 FUCKING TIMES. Jesus the fucking stoopid. It's the stock market manipulation/corruption David, not Iran.
DeleteIn David's defense, he wouldn't like anything about Trump if Trump wasn't a gigantic bigot.
DeleteFanny Blowfart was here.
ReplyDeleteBroflauntulaunce
DeleteWhy in the fuck is the fucking tarp still covering JFK’s name on the Kennedy Center? Baby Huey having a temper tantrum?
ReplyDeletePolling at 15% approval rating for a cage match on the White House lawn. Meanwhile a commercial pilot files an FAA report that the lights interfered with his landing approach. Way to go, Donnie.
ReplyDeleteTrump is the greatest danger to our democracy, not technology.
ReplyDeleteTechnology, both the infrastructure and the people who own it, enabled Trump. It will continue enabling Trumpism long after Trump is gone.
DeleteI don't have much sympathy for men who mess up their lives and then expect to start over with a clean slate, but this post explains why support for Platner is consistent with Democratic Party values:
ReplyDeletehttps://yastreblyansky.blogspot.com/2026/06/sooner-or-later-godll-cut-you-down.html
"“President Trump and Iran over the weekend offered conflicting timelines for the signing of a potential peace agreement, casting doubt on whether a deal might be signed on Sunday or in the coming days,” the New York Times reports."
ReplyDeleteThis is what happens when you have amateurs pretending to do diplomacy.
Times's news stories have a practice that I find obnoxious. They not only tell us what happened: they tell us what it means. That is, what the Times thinks it means. Or, what the Times wants us to think it means.
DeleteThe sentence quote above is an example. It's fact that conflicting stories are out there. It's a conclusion that the conflict casts doubt on an agreement being reached. In this case, it's an obvious conclusion. But, why say it? The impression I get is that the Times is telling its readers that we're not smart enough to reason from A to B.
BTW this is also an example of the Times faulting Trump for something that didn't happen. The deal has not fallen apart. It's just speculation that it might fall apart. The Times tricked @11:56 into thinking that Trump had done something amateurish.
This is an extension of the fact-checking that became necessary when the press realized what a huge liar Trump is. The press has a dilemma. It cannot print the lies without some warning to the public, because newspapers are about reporting truth and people count on the info being reliable. But the press is also not supposed to inject itself into the stories. By now, Trump has waffled so much over an Iran deal that it is a fact that these announcements are not reliable. So, when the NY Times says the deal may not happen, that is a historical fact based on Trump's repeated failure to achieve a firm deal, not an opinion of the NY Times.
DeleteDavid, you do not know yourself whether this deal will go through. Odds are it won't. But you say "The deal has not fallen apart." and that is not at all certain.
Wouldn't it be nice to have a president whose word you could trust?
And yes, Trump's diplomatic staff have done something amateurish, because Trump appoints people based on looks and loyalty not competence. A competent staff would have coordinated their press announcement with Iranian diplomats so that they wouldn't be on different pages in public. It is clear they haven't done that at any point in negotiations. That's because, whether there is a deal or not, they have no idea how to be diplomats.
Hi, I’m dickhead in cal, I crawled naked through Paris sewer’s three fucking times to vote for a lying sack of shit treasonous bastard corrupt and ignorant fraud. I demand all the world treat the fucking felon with respect. I come to this progressive blog because I am an obnoxious troll.
DeleteI partially agree with you, @12:40. Certainly Trump's lies and exaggerations present a challenge for media. The conflicting stories do indeed look amateurish. Everything about peace agreement is entirely uncertain.
DeleteBut, there are also lies by Trump's opponents. Consider that most-frequent, most-easily-debunked lie--that Trump had called Nazis "fine people." The Times didn't correct when Biden repeated this lie.
Regretfully, I've given up on the Times. I grew up loving and admiring the New York Times. I've been reading it for 70 years. They even printed 3 or 4 of my letters to the editor. But, the Times I loved is gone. The last straw was reporting that Israel had trained dogs to rape Palestinians.
Your example is off topic.
DeleteDickhead in Cal is a Jewish Zionist atheist white Christian Nationalist who is very offended when people deny that some torch carrying white supremacists chanting “Jews will not replace us” are very fine people.
DeleteTroll DiC keeps humping fat fuck felon is not a Nazi approver while conveniently forgetting the felon invites actual Nazis to dinner and loads his USSC and cabinet with the fucking Nazi fuckers.
DeleteDavid in Cal,
DeleteIt's ridiculous the New York Times "reports" Republicans want to give tax breaks to billionaires because they believe in smaller government and economic growth, despite the fact that no Republican actually believes what they say.
1:05. You stupid fuck. The challenges to the media imposed by Trump's lies are the least egregious sins. . Trump's lies affect US relations with valued trading partners and allies in the West, and corrode this country's position in competition with China, on multiple fronts. They also destabilize markets. If your child intentionally fabricated the amount that Trump does on a regular basis, you would be aptly considered a failure as a parent. On the other hand, your acceptance of the immorality we are witnessing from this president suggests that you wouldn't care one way or another about the degenerate you would have raised.
DeleteMultiple human rights agencies have cited the widespread sexual abuse of Palestinians by settlers and Israeli military. The NYT article of May 11 included testimony of many such victims, including those who described the participation of dogs. Whether or not you believe that part is irrelevant to the bigger picture which has been well documented. But it is understandable that you would veer away from anything printed that would caste Israeli conduct unfavorably, being an unapologetic Zionist.
DeleteFrom Tom Sullivan at Digby's blog:
ReplyDelete"And so should we all scream at what Donald Trump has done — is doing — to the promise of America. His gladiatorial atrocity is a sin against us all. It is a stubby Trump middle finger to everything that was, is, or might be beautiful in this perpetual argument between monarchy and popular sovereignty.
For all its flaws and original sin of slavery, what America’s founders sought to build 250 years ago has, with fits and starts and painfully slowly, moved us towards becoming that more perfect union … even beyond whatever future they first imagined. It is sometimes said that you can’t legislate morality. Neither can a constitution in 250 years rewrite the baser instincts evolution took millions of years to encode in homo sapiens.
What the framers of the Constitution never imagined was Donald Trump, a man (and a movement) so debased, so irredeemable that he would defile with tasteless spectacle the temple Americans erected to the memory of the “Great Emancipator” and savior of the republic. Members of the first Congress could not have imagined a corporate-sponsored gladiatorial arena erected on the grounds of the presidential residence they commissioned.
The “short-fingered vulgarian” is not celebrating his 80th birthday nor 250 years of American progress. He’s flipping off all of it, and all of us, for not kissing his ass deeply and lovingly enough, by desecrating every American temple presidential authority touches."
What magnificent, fact-free purple prose! Grade A+
DeleteThe Lincoln Memorial means something to many Americans. Trump has defiled this with a crass money making venture.
DeleteThe media reporting the Republican Party is nothing more than an international pedophile ring, is hardly "news".
DeleteSenior Iranian leader blocks agreement
ReplyDeleteAhmad Vahidi, commander of the IRGC and a highly influential figure within the regime, led the decision to launch missiles at Israel and became a major obstacle to reaching an agreement with President Trump.
Iran’s decision to launch ballistic missiles at Israel after months of ceasefire was not only a military message but also an attempt to demonstrate the new balance of power in Tehran.
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/428595
“months of cease fire “. lol
DeleteThat is quite an objective source, fuckface
You wonder how even a disgusting bigot troll like DiC can maintain his various stances while the corruption and stupid crush everything around the MAGA movement.
DeleteSay what you will about the Republican Party, but you can't say they don't love sexualizing children.
DeleteWhy this cannot be true. After the joint strikes by Israel and the US months ago we were told on multiple occasions that the new regime would be easier to negotiate with. By none other than that pillar of truth, Donald J. Trump. At a time when seasoned Middle East experts were saying the opposite on "fake news". So Donny is not going to get a birthday present from the hard liners , after all. Guess he'll have to settle for a cage match on the White House lawn to bring a smile to his face. Class act.
DeleteSo Trump appears to have his deal, after all. Strait of Hormuz is open. Signing planned for Friday in Switzerland. I hope the signing actually occurs as planned.
Delete8:52,
DeleteI hope Republicans stop raping children.
Which of us is more likely to have our hopes dashed?
Top White House officials believe New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan obtained audio recordings of Situation Room meetings for their forthcoming book, “Regime Change.” Such a taped leak would be a shocking breach of one of the most secure settings on Earth. Independent recording devices in the Situation Room are forbidden.
ReplyDelete“We’re afraid some of our most sensitive conversations were being recorded,” an administration source told us. “And we have no idea which ones.”
If it isn’t gross corruption it’s mind boggling incompetence. What a fucking circus is the WH nowadays.
When you need to coverup sexual abuse of children by the fat abomination currently sitting in the Oval Office, it just might take secret strategy sessions in the Situation Room. I mean, fuck, orange chickenshit sure doesn’t use the room for its intended purpose.
DeleteWho would have recorded and passed on that information to NYT reporters from Trump's inner sanctum? Seems unlikely but if there is specific information, the date and attendance at such meetings would be known to them and they can get out the polygraph.
DeleteYes, maybe “they” will hook the polygraph to John Baron. 😂
DeleteThat John Barron will do anything to get his name in the paper. Him thinking it is still 1994 and all.
DeleteThis perhaps illustrates why Trump places such a premium on loyalty.
DeleteTrump likes loyalists, especially the kind who will negotiate the transfer of 1.8 billion taxpayer dollars to his wallet in the settlement of a bullshit lawsuit.
DeleteThis perhaps illustrates why you are in immoral piece of shit, dickhead.
DeleteThe cage fight on the White House lawn was perhaps the highlight of Trump’s presidency, with on UFC fighter feeling quite comfortable publicly stating that Michelle Obama is a man. These are Trump’s people, publicly racist knuckle draggers.
ReplyDeleteThe comment was so racist, so irrelevant to anything that was happening and so Obama obsessive that the possibility he was paid to say it by Trump or his minions is a consideration.
DeleteMy God, how much longer, Dear Lord
DeletePhat Phanny was here.
ReplyDelete