Wednesday, May 20, 2020

Back when it seemed like women did nothing but die in songs

In the early days of rock and roll, they used to kill off the men. 

"Tell Laura I Love Her" and "The Leader of the Pack" are just two examples.

By the seventies, however, it seems the pendulum had swung the other way and we got a host of songs about dying women.

The ones about men dying were usually dramatic.  The ones in the seventies about women dying were pretty maudlin.

I'll note two.  If you haven't heard them before, I'm sorry for being the one to introduce them to you.

"My Sweet Lady."



That's John Denver's performance.  He does a little bit lighter and less melodramatic.  John actually wrote the song.  Cliff DeYoung had the hit with it.  It was in the TV movie SUNSHINE about a woman who falls in love, gets married, gives birth and gets cancer -- all in about two years.  She is doing chemotherapy for the cancer but decides to stop doing that because she wants to be a mother and wife.  She dies, of course.  Cliff plays the husband.  He sang the song in the TV movie and his version went all the way to number nine on the top forty.


Lady, are you crying, do the tears belong to me?
Did you think our time together was all gone?
Lady, you've been dreaming, I'm as close as I can be
And I swear to you our time has just begun
Close your eyes and rest your weary mind
I promise I will stay right here beside you
Today our lives were joined, became entwined
I wish that you could know how much I love you
Lady, are you happy? Do you feel the way I do?
Are there meanings that you've never seen before
Lady, my sweet lady, I just can't believe it's true
And it's like I've never, ever loved before
Close your eyes and rest your weary mind
I promise I will stay right here beside you
Today our lives were joined, became entwined
I wish that you could know how much I love you
Lady, are you crying, do the tears belong to me?
Did you think our time together was all gone?
Lady, you've been dreaming, I'm as close as I can be
And I swear to you our time has just begun

Now there's "Rocky."



Austin Roberts actually had a hit with that one.  She's diagnosed with something -- the song can't even specify what -- so she dies also.

Alone until my eighteenth year
We met four springs ago
She was shy and had a fear
Of things she did not know
But we got it on together
In such a super way
We held each other close at night
And traded dreams each day
And she said,
"Rocky, I've never been in love before
Don't know if I can do it
But if you let me lean on you
Take my hand, I might get through it" (through it)
I said, "Baby, oh sweet baby
It's love that sets us free
And God knows if the world should end
Your love is safe with me"
We found an old gray house
And you would not believe the way
We worked at night to fix it up
Took classes in the day
Paintin' walls and sippin' wine
Sleepin' on the floor
With so much love for just two
Soon we found there'd be one more
And she said,
"Rocky, I've never had a baby before
Don't know if I can do it
But if you let me lean on you
Take my hand, I might get through it" (through it)
I said, "Baby, oh sweet baby
It's love that sets us free
And God knows if the world should end
Your love is safe with me"
We had lots of problems then but
We had lots of fun
Like the crazy party
When our baby girl turned one
I was proud and satisfied
Life had so much to give
'Till the day they told me
That she didn't have long to live
She said,
"Rocky, I've never had to die before
Don't know if I can do it..."
Now it's back to two again
The little girl and I
Who looks so much like her sweet mother
Sometimes it makes me cry
I sleep alone at nights again
I walk alone each day
And sometimes when I'm about to give in
I hear her sweet voice say, to me
"Rocky, you know you've been alone before
You know that you can do it
But if you'd like to lean on me
Take my hand, I'll help you through it" (through it)
I said, "Baby, oh sweet baby
It's love that sets us free
And I told you when the world would end
Your love was safe with me"
She said,
"Rocky, you know you've been alone before
You know that you can do it
But if you'd like to lean on me...


Have you ever heard the term "Meepie"?  It's "male weepie."  It's a term that's applied to Harrison Ford's REGARDING HENRY and William Hurt's THE DOCTOR and other Joan Crawford type films where the lead is a man who suffers. 

They say the genre started in the late 80s, but they're wrong.

It flourished in the seventies with films like LOVE STORY and TV movies like SUNSHINE and MESSAGE TO MY DAUGHTER.

Closing with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"


Wednesday, May 20, 2020.  Katha Pollitt attacks Tara Reade and we look at who Iraq War Joe might choose as his running mate.


The same criminals keep showing up.  If you watch long enough, they'll continue to show up.  Case in point?  Katha Pollitt.  Apparently, she doesn't have an ex-boyfriend to stalk anymore and has exhausted even her own interest in typing bad sentences that she swears are poetry.  So  she tells you that she doesn't believe Tara Reade this morning -- and she says it at THE NATION -- and goes on to endorse Joe Biden.

Remember that editorial at THE NATION?  How they wouldn't endorse anyone who voted for the Iraq War?  They put that editorial on the cover -- the first paragraphs ran on the cover of the issue.  They were real big talkers, weren't they?  They just couldn't do.

And they still can't.

And Katha?  She's been a whore for years.  Not just a stalker, but a whore.  One word: Abeer.


Abeer Qassim Hamza al-Janabi.  From THIRD's "Justice for Abeer and her family?:"



On March 12, 2006, in their family home, Qassim Hamza Raheem and Fakhriya Taha Muhasen and their five-year old daughter Hadeel Qassim Hamza were murdered. Their fourteen-year-old daughter Abeer was raped and murdered and there was an attempt to burn her body to hide what had happened.


We covered Abeer's story extensively and repeatedly. We covered the Article 32 hearings, we covered the case in the civilian courts, we covered it over and over.  She was gang-raped by US soldiers.  This isn't in debate, they turned on each other to get a plea deal.  They plotted to break into her home in order to gang-rape her.  They murdered her parents and her sister while they raped her and then they killed her.  They weren't done though.  Having killed her, they now tried to burn her body in the house to destroy evidence.

This was a major War Crime.  It was carried out by US soldiers.  Yet US citizen Katha Pollitt wasn't interested and had to be shamed and mocked (by us and by Alexander Cockburn who -- for the record -- actually wrote about Abeer).  Under duress, faded 'feminist' Katha stop composing bad verse long enough to offer this, "Think of Abeer Qassim al-Janabi, the 14-year-old girl raped and then murdered with her family by US soldiers in Mahmoudiya in March last year."

That sentence so exhausted her, that single sentence, that she never, ever returned to the topic.  But she wants you to think she's a feminist -- a real one -- even though people in the Middle East who know of her (not a huge number) see her as another Jewish woman who won't call out attacks on Muslims -- whether it's in Iraq or Palestine or wherever.

That's just one of many reasons not to trust Katha.  There's also the fact that she's paid to share what she believes is an opinion.  When JOURNOLIST was published, some lost jobs.  Katha should have lost her job.  She's paid to provide her opinion.  NATION readers have every right to assume she's being honest.  But there she was e-mailing about how Sarah Palin was very effective -- and that worried her -- but days later, in her paying job, she's smearing and attacking Sarah Palin.

She's paid to express her opinion and, thanks to the published e-mails, we know she was impressed by Sarah Palin yet she wrote something completely different.

2016ers need an education if they're claiming Hillary faced hideous sexism.  She didn't.  In 2008, she did.  You had Barack flipping her off to the amusement of many, you had Barack talking about how "periodically" when Hillary's "feeling blue" "the claws come out."  You had cable 'news' mocking her -- there are video compilations on YOUTUBE, look it up.  You had Hillary "nut crackers."  You had Matthew Rothschild -- at THE PROGRESSIVE, at THE PROGRESSIVE -- being delighted by the fact that a group against Hillary had initials that formed a swear word (the c-word).

And while all this was going on, while so many of us were calling this nonsense out -- Delilah Boyd was, Carolyn Kay was, numerous women who would form PUMA were -- Katha was, as she admitted in a column, staying silent.  She didn't want to hurt 'the cause.'

Feminism?

She's not a feminist.

She's fat and ugly and lives in New York so she pretends she's a feminist.  But a feminist doesn't stay silent for 'the cause' when the cause is not feminism.

In her garbage this morning she not only tells you that she doesn't believe Tara Reade that Joe Biden assaulted her, she also wants you to know that, even if she did believe Tara, she'd still vote for Joe.

Due to her complicated history with truth, it's hard to tell whether Katha means what she says or if she's just once again helping 'the cause.'

Here's another thing feminists don't do: They don't vote for rapists.

Stop the bulls**t.  Second wave feminism was all about making rape and domestic violence -- both are terrorism, let's use today's terms -- serious issues.  They weren't serious once upon a time.  With rape, for example, you'd better be a virgin and you better have been dressed modestly and had nothing to drink.

If you look at the recent coverage of Tara, you'll see that the rape culture we thought we had defeated -- we being feminists -- is re-emerging.

I'm not surprised that fat and ugly, weird nose and chicken fat face Katha doesn't get it.  Again, if you're an ugly eye sore posing as an 'intellectual' in NYC, the easiest path is to pose as a feminist.

Rape isn't okay.

The Kathas are useless bitches.  They want you to know that a second term of Donald Trump --

If you don't want a second term of Trump, you need to be fighting for the Democratic Party to get a better candidate.  The history shows that anything can happen at a convention and anything can happen before a convention.

That's not me rooting for Bernie.  He's a fake ass, he betrayed everyone.  Yes, I do know and like Gavin Newsom and Andrew Cuomo, but I'd be fine with anyone who wasn't senile, hadn't voted for the Iraq War and wasn't accused of assault.

I don't think that 'dream list' is too much to ask for.  I'm not even asking for Medicare For All from the nominee -- even though it's what America needs.

My three demands are very basic and shouldn't be considered controversial.

Here's the other thing.

Katha preaches in her column all the awful things Donald's going to do in a second term.  First off, many of those things were done when Barack Obama was president and Katha didn't give a damn.  When someone she likes destroys families with deportations, she looks the other way or finds some justification for it.  When it is someone she doesn't like doing it, she assumes the worst.

More to the point, Democrats just went along with continued spying on the American people.  At a time when Donald is president.  They're okay with that.

Katha's fears go to the fact that you don't have a Democratic representatives who will stand up for anything.

Oh, dear goodness!  The Supreme Court!!


I can remember when Democrats in the Senate could block Supreme Court nominees.  These days, only the Republicans know how to fight a nominee.

All of the fears she lists are valid fears -- if we live in a monarchy.  But we don't.  The president is the head of the executive branch.  There are three co-equal branches of our government.  If the legislative branch did its job we wouldn't have to worry.

Prior to the 1992 election, 'intellectuals' were saying that the Democratic Party would never again have the presidency.  They were saying that they needed to adapt to that and form a stronger Congressional opposition.  It doesn't have to be either/or.  We should be able to compete for the presidency and to have a thriving opposition to the GOP in the Congress.

We posted Krystal Ball's pathetic rebuttal or 'rebuttal' to some of the nonsense about Tara Reade.  Pathetic.  The day before, Ava and I wrote "Media: Lies and liars all around."  In that, we noted what no one wanted to tell you about PBS's 'investigation.'  The 74 people they spoke with were people the campaign gave them.

Instead of Krystal ripping apart the report on that basis she offers that she 'knows' how this works and this was probably all fed to PBS by the campaign and --

Probably?  It's right there in the report.

Learn to fight.  I'm so sick of this crap.

So 74 Joe Biden supporters all defend Joe.  As Carol Burnett's Eunice would say, "Surprise, surprise, surprise."

No one is addressing the charges with one exception.

The alcove!!!!!

There's not one!!!!

I'm sorry, I've been to the Senate many times.  Am I the only one who has ever noticed renovations?

I have no idea if there was ever an alcove.  But I do know that I wouldn't be at all shocked if something that was in the Russell Building in 1993 was no longer, in 2020, there.

I'm tired of all of this.  I'm tired of Joe Biden's campaign working overtime to turn Tara toxic.  I'm tired of his supporters -- that includes Katha, she's voting for him -- doing the dirty work of bringing back rape culture.

I'm tried of ugly bitches who could never land a man (or a woman) trying to mask their miserable lives and their miserable failures by insisting that they are "feminists."

If you're defending a rapist, you're not a feminist.  If you're saying you're going to vote for someone accused of rape, you're not a feminist.  If you're smearing a woman who came forward to talk about her assault, you're not a feminist.

You can be many things, but stop pretending you're a feminist.

Katha, you're just ugly.

Leslie Templeton Tweets:

It’s funny how most survivors I talk to believe Tara because they have said nice things about their rapist also and have changed their story due to not remembering everything or withheld information because they felt scared or embarrassed.


Anthony Zenkus:

But you are questioning her truthfulness and not his. Holding a victim to a different standard than her accused rapist is an example of rape culture. Nice job.


I may return to Katha and 'the cause' tomorrow.  For now, let's keep a promise I made.  I was asked to talk some of Joe Biden's possible running mate.

His brisk walk mate?  We know he can't run.

Let me go there first in case he wins in 2020 which means he won't seek re-election in 2024.

Person: It's a shame Joe can't run again.

Me: Yeah, but on a good day, he can still walk.

Okay.  VP choice.  I'm not going to play let's predict who it is.  A) I have no crystal ball and B) everyone I know with the campaign talks of the disorder and chaos they have to endure daily so let's not pretend that they have it together.

I'm also not going to talk what I want.  My politics are too far left to be pleased with anyone Joe would actually consider.

The press has spent way too much time on this topic which is why I try to avoid it.  It's meaningless.  He's going to pick someone and after he does we should look back at all the time and space the media gave this nonsense.

He and Elizabeth Warren do not get along.  That's not recent, that goes back years.  Joe is not someone who wants to debate or discuss.  He's had his ass kissed for too many decades.  He wants someone who'll do what he says and do it when he says.

That bumps Kamala Harris and Amy Klobuchar to the forefront.

Amy has a problem with those who work under her.  So does Joe.  The media looks the other way except for the random whisper of how no one wanted to tell Joe this or that because he explodes.

Those arguing against Amy, who have his ear, are pointing to her problems with staff.  They are not saying, "You know, like the problems you have."  Joe, oblivious as always, agrees Amy has a problem with staff interaction -- Amy has a problem -- just Amy.

That leaves Kamala.  Kamala knows how to push an issue while not seeming to.  She knows work arounds.  This allows her to seem more positive with those around her.  (That is not meant as an insult.)  Kamala also did far less damage on stage when she spoke in the debates.  Kamala has the resume.  Kamala has the confidence.

If I were advising, I'd say go with Kamala.  She also brings with her a very active online presence which the campaign desperately needs.

Gretch the Wretch has thrown herself out of consideration with one bad interview performance after another and a voice that seen as too youthful and high pitched.

Tammy Baldwin -- who would make a wonderful vice president or president -- is not in serious consideration, I am told.

Joe needs to make a choice and it needs to be someone who could run for the presidency in 2024 and it needs to be someone who, if he died in office, could immediately assume the presidency.

That means it comes down to Kamala or Amy.  Again, Kamala has the resume, Kamala has her own social media network army, Kamala comes off stronger on camera.  There's also Amy's weight.  It's not Stacey Abrhams level but when the presidential nominee already raises health concerns, you need a running mate who appears fit.

Who will he pick?  Who knows?  But of those under serious consideration, Kamala would be the best pick he could make.




The following sites updated:






Tuesday, May 19, 2020

LEGALLY BLONDE 3?

LEGALLY BLONDE II? I liked it. I wanted to love it. Sally Field was in it and I was all primed to see Sally strut her comedic stuff. But they really didn't give her much to do. And the storyline that they had for Elle Woods was disappointing. Let me give an example of how disappointing it was. MISS CONGENIALITY with Sandra Bullock had a paint-by-number storyline. But it was funny. I did not like the sequel when it came out. But the sequel has aged well and it serves as a perfect compliment -- the first one is sweet and the sequel is sour. But LEGALLY BLONDE II? That's just stupid.

The first movie was perfection. Real brains went into being silly. There was the main story of whether or not Elle would triumph. There was the mystery involving whether or not the Denise Richards type murdered her husband. There was the love story with Luke Wilson. There were secondary stories as well -- like the one with Jennifer Coolidge. It was just a great movie. It'll never be studied in France, I'm sure, but it was a great movie.

I mention all of that because Mindy Kaling and Dan Cooper have been hired to write LEGALLY BLONDE III. Does anyone need it? And short of teaming Elle up with Danny Glover, is there any twist they can pursue?

On the first question, I like Mindy Kaling's books and often find them hilarious. I also love THE MINDY PROJECT. Not as impressed with her film wise. I found the one with Emma Thompson to be very disappointing (and I love Emma). I also did not care for OCEAN'S 8 and the only thing making the film worse was Mindy's griping. She didn't write the movie. But she kept insisting that anyone who didn't love it was sexist. No, Mindy, the film just wasn't any good.

It looked good. But the only real performance was Anne Hathaway. I love Sandra Bullock and she looked great. But there was no role for her. It's probably my least favorite Sandra film starting with SPEED. To be clear, I love SPEED but I'm starting her films with that one. Not with some of the lame movies she made before then. Actually, I'll start it with THE THING CALLED LOVE. That was before SPEED and it's a great film -- River Phoenix, Samantha Mathis, Dermont Mulraney and Sandra. But I really can't stand OCEAN'S 8.

I should be honest, I never saw Sandra's NETFLIX film. I wasn't interested. If Sandra goes too long without a comedy, I tend to fade. Her comedies are my favorites of her films with the exception of THE NET which I can watch over and over. I love WHILE YOU WERE SLEEPING, THE PROPOSAL, MISS CONGENIALITY, HOPE FLOATS,THE HEAT and, yes, even ALL ABOUT STEVE. I love her in a comedy. She's fun and funny.

But OCEAN'S 8 was not funny. And if you pull out Anne Hathaway, it's not even a film worth seeing. So I do question Mindy's judgment. Not for making the film, but for rushing to defend it after it came out and insisting sexism was why people didn't find it funny.

I don't think there are a lot of twists they could go with. If I were writing it, I'd try to think up an action scene of some sort just to make it a little different.


Closing with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

 
Tuesday, May 19, 2020.  At what point does the media plan to stop pretending Joe Biden is just a disinterested bystander?


Starting in the US where Anthony Zenkus is addressing realities:

At the heart of criticisms against Tara Reade is a serious lack of understanding on how trauma affects people. 
As a professional who has worked with trauma victims most of my career, and who trains judges, police and other professionals about it, I am concerned that this lack of understanding trauma clouds not only Reade's case, but makes it more unlikely that victims will come fwd. 
Being obsessed with small details- like what part of a hallway the rape took place in- shows a lack of understanding of how trauma memories get stored in the brain. 
The brain doesn't remember traumatic events in a linear, detailed fashion. It stores things like colors, temperatures, smells and sounds - sensory memories. The purpose is to alert us in the future when similar danger might be present. 
Tens of thousands of years ago when our stress response systems were forming, it didn't matter exactly where a predator started chasing you. What mattered was it's color, it's smell, what sounds it made, what it looked like. Evolution made it so our brains store things like that. 
Our stress systems formed before we had any idea what a calendar was. Fates and times are not part of this process. This is an ancient mechanism designed to keep us alive. 
Expecting trauma survivors to have recall of details that the brain does not consider relevant is foolish. Dr. Blasey Ford explained it well when she testified before Congress about Bretr Kavanaugh. 
At the time, many lauded her for her intelligence and subject matter knowledge and stood by her. Today, some of these same people are ignoring this knowledge while trying to cast doubt on Tara Reade's story, using the same responses that the GOP senators used against Blasey Ford. 
Any understanding of trauma shows us that victims don't recall events in ways that are easy for people on the outside to understand. It can be frustrating for those who try to decide where the truth lies, and even more frustrated for victims who know what happened to them. 
Victims of traumatic events find it hard to recall things in a way that satisfies their detractors. Using this against some victims while pretending to be trauma-informed when it comes to thers is not helpful. 
Details like time and exact place may matter in a criminal proceeding, and this is why so many rape cases never see the inside of a courtroom. But the case against Joe Biden is not a criminal proceeding. 
People trying to determine the veracity of the allegations against Biden need to use the same metric that they used to decide if Blasey Ford was telling the truth: is the essence of what the victim is saying true? Not "does she remember the date or exact place?". 
Ultimately, the Tara Reade case is an opportunity to make us more trauma-unformed as a society. Unfortunately, it has fallen along partisan lines and mostly we are missing the boat here. 
Instead of listening to the essence of what Ms. Reade has said, doubters are focusing on the details that aren't easily recalled. Ms. Reade's story of how Biden penetrated her with his fingers while pinning her against a wall has not changed. 
The memories of her feeling of confusion and shock while it was happening have not changed. Her memory of seemingly innocuous details, like how the marble floor felt hars on her feet, or that the wall was cold, jave not changed. 
These are trauma memories. They are not linear and they may seem scattered or irrelevant to those who are not trauma-informed. To those of us who have knowledge of trauma, they are clear indications that the essence of her story is true. 
Leading researchers in the field of yrauma like Bessel van der Kolk have written and taught extensively about this. His book, "The Body Keeps the Score", is an excellent guide to understanding how trauma loves in our bodies and our memories. 
The way that victims tell their stories can make it difficult for police officers who are trying to take a coherent statement. It can also make it difficult for judges and prosecutors to figure out what really happened. 
As a subject matter expert in trauma and sexual violence, I have trained judges, oolice and orisecutora, in addition to thousands of other professionals, on how trauma impacts us. 
I had no idea what to make of Ms. Reade's claims when I first heard about them. After listening to her full hour interview on the @kthalps podcast, it was clear to me that she sounded like ao manybither victims of sexual trauma that I have known throughout my career. 
What has happened since Ms. Reade came out with her story has been tragic. News outlets have picked apart her past while ugnoring the essence of her story. Most of the people who have said that they believe Biden's denial have never listened to that full podcast. 
In addition to the Katie Halper podcast (linked below), Ms. Reade has given 3 other interviews, all on camera, with various news outlets, in addition to conversations with many print outlets.
Instead of listening to her in her own words, many have chosen to dive into bews reports about landlords who said she was late on her rent, or question her truthfulness based on whether she ever owed anyone money and didn't pay it back on time. 
None of these things change the fact that the essence of Ms. Reade's story about being digitally raped by Mr. Biden has not changed since she told it, or the fact that witnesses have come forward saying that Ms. Reade has told them part or all of that horrible story. 
The fact that it took her 26 years to go public with this story is also irrelevant. Most victims never tell. Those that do, often tell bits and pieces along the way, like Ms. Reade did when she spoke in 2019 about how Mr. Biden touched her inappropriately. 
Those who defended Dr. Blasey Ford never questioned why she waited over 30 years before coming forward, or that she couldn't remember specific details. They never interviewed her past landlords or asked old friends if they thought she was a good person. 
These defenders of Blasey Ford disn't do these things because these things don't matter when it comes to understanding whether someone has suffered a traumatic event or not l. It would be fair and right if they gave Ms. Reade the same treatment.
#IBelieveTaraReade 


It would be fair.  So why isn't it happening? Joe Biden.

First and foremost, these attacks are led by the Biden campaign.  As we've noted before, you've got one connected to Joe bragging online about feeding Marc Caputo of POLITICO everything that went into the attack piece on Tara.  THE NEWSHOUR's 'investigation' was them speaking to 74 people the Joe Biden campaign told them to speak to.  That wasn't an investigation, it was a Mickey Mouse Club roll call -- "I'm Cubby!  I'm Annette!"

Senator Patty Murray has nothing to say in defense of Tara?  Senator Dianne Feinstein and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi insult and degrade Tara?  It's Joe Biden.  It's an election and we can't have the truth, we can't afford the truth, they believe.

Remember that, survivors, don't tell your story at election time.  Never, ever.  You're upsetting 'the process.'  Most of all you're disclosing the lie that the press vets candidates.

The press hasn't 'vetted' Joe Biden.  Joe has lied for decades.  He's a known liar whose lying derailed his first attempt to win the Democratic Party's presidential nomination.  Stories that vetted Joe would include stories about his son Hunter and his brothers and the sweet-heart (and unethical) deals they made.  Tara had trouble paying bills and that's a national story -- even though it has nothing to do with her allegation that Joe assaulted her.

By contrast, a fifty-year-old man, Hunter Biden, who has plenty of money to spend on strippers and drugs and even enough to send them out of the strip club to buy a fresh dildo to peg him with (he's a safety boy) can't/won't pay child support and that's not a major story?

Joe Biden has raked in $15 million in the short time since his term as Vice President ended.  And Joe can't pay child support for his grandchild?

That's not a story?

Tara's finances are a story, somehow.  She's not running to be president.

She doesn't have a history of family corruption.  She doesn't have a history of lying.

Joe's campaign keeps attacking Tara and the worst part of that may be how the press refuses to get honest about that and instead just repeats Joe's on air statements.  I

She is not being provided with a safe space to tell her story while Anita Dunn runs the campaign against her.  That's a campaign Joe gave the green light to.  They are tearing apart a woman and it's shameful that so much of the press is participating in that but it's even more shameful that, as it happens before our eyes, so many refuse to note that Joe Biden is responsible for the attacks.

And we're talking about the press and some may wrongly think I'm just talking corporate media.  No, this is All Things Media Big and Small.


Look at the dumpster diver that is BUZZFLASH.  Here's something from the recent e-mail that landed in the public account (it's not a private e-mail, they wanted what I'm quoting and everything else in the e-mail to go up here):

BuzzFlash wants to increase Its original reporting on the pathology of Donald Trump and, after his removal from office, advancing progressive issues.


"After his removal from office"?  That's when the push to advance progressive issues will begin.

Grasp that BUZZFLASH has spent the time since the election obsessing over Donald Trump.  They've been in reactionary mode.  They've advanced nothing, they've led on nothing.  They've made their whole lives about Donald Trump -- how pathetic.  And how useless.

COMMON DREAMS doesn't have much to offer these days -- nothing of real value.  With the primaries over, COMMON DREAMS isn't interested in truth about Joe Biden.  Instead, they run what amounts to p.r. releases for him.

There really isn't much independent media or independence in media.  Manufacturing consent?  I wish that was the goal.  No, it's morphed into running pep rallies for politicians.

That is why they constantly have to rebuild their audiences, by the way.  It's not just that voters stop believing in the system and drop out.  It's also that they stop believing in so-called 'independent' media that lies and schills.  They get their feel of it and they stop visiting this or that site or following this or that program.

Ronan Farrow and Ben Smith.  I haven't read Ben Smith's article (judging by what Glenn Greenwald wrote, the 'harsh' critiques Ben offered are nothing compared to David Walsh's coverage of Ronan's work that Walsh has been writing about for years now at WSWS).  I like Ben, he's a media critic.  He's not there to hand out flowers.  Ronan?  Back when he was on MSNBC, in 2014, Ava and I offered "TV: Another idiot for the idiot box" about his TV performance.  I don't have time to dive into the latest controversy, nor do I want to.  I did check Mia's Twitter feed hoping for some sort of coherent comment that I would post here with no comment.

'You never posted anything!'  Because there was nothing coherent.

Ronan's work is flawed.  That's true of the bulk of work done by anyone. Ronan's work also has strengths.  Ben critiquing it is not the end of the world, it's Ben doing his job.  Rose McGowan has stated that Ben misled her stating he wanted to talk about #MeToo.

I love Rose but: And your point is?

That's what reporters do.  They flatter and fake and then they stab you in the back. I don't doubt Rose but, again, that is what the press does.

All of this focus on Ben Smith is amazing to me because if I had time to write about something other than Tara Reade or Iraq, I'd be writing about the rank stupidity in article that IN THESE TIMES published.  The answer, for the children -- sing it, Whitney, is to give every child a $1,000 fund.  That will help them in the next pandemic!

How?

How is that equal, how is that fair -- yes.  More to the point, the most likely outcome of such a venture would be harm.  The little that was done this go round for We The People would be even less.  Nancy Pelosi Let Them Eat Ice Cream would be saying, "Well we gave them that $1,000 trust.  Can't they spend that?"  In fact, that's what the stupid IN THESE TIMES article offers.

Now when Bernie was still a candidate, these outlets could hide behind Bernie and criticize the party. Democrats in Congress have done nothing for the people of America in the stimulus bills.

That's reality.  But it blurs and fades as we get closer and closer to an election and so-called media believes their role is to be a DNC organ, to propagandize for the party.  That's not helping anyone, it never has.

Ali Jawad (ANADOLU AGENCY) reports:

Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi said Tuesday he has assumed power as the country's treasury was almost empty.

"When I assumed responsibility I found only an almost empty treasury and an unenviable situation after 17 years of change," al-Kadhimi said in an article published by Baghdad Today newspaper.


"Our sovereignty continued to be deficient, violated and doubted," he said.



Where did the money go?  Yes, the coronavirus pandemic has led to many costs.  But does the Iraqi government ever plan to address the theft carried out by various officials?  Apparently, the answer is no. If the people suffer because you looted, too bad.  That's what the attitude is.  It's why Iraqis show up in the streets to protest corruption.


In other Iraq news, the Green Zone has been attacked.




The following sites updated: