I was going to do a science post. Instead, let me note that pedophile Peter Yarrow has passed away.
Who?
He
was part of Peter, Paul and Mary. They were a folk trio that started
in 1961. Their 1970 best of eventually sold 2 million copies as did
their 1962 debut album PETER, PAUL AND MARY. ALBUM 1700 (in 1967)
eventually sold a million copies. "Eventually"? A hit record in the
sixties was usually not a platinum in its time. Gold was the big
success. They had four studio albums go gold, one children's album go
gold and one live album go gold. They landed 12 singles in the pop top
forty from to 1969. 1969 was their big year when "Leaving On A Jet
Plane" (written by John Denver and most of us under 60 probably know it
best from the film ARMAGEDDON) hit number one. Their only number one
hit. 1962's "If I Had A Hammer" made it to number ten. "I Dig Rock and
Roll Music" name checks Mama Cass and Mama Michelle and it made it to
number nine and is from their million selling ALBUM 1700. In 1963,
their cover of Bob Dylan's "Don't Think Twice, It's All Right" also hit
number nine. 1963 also resulted in two songs that made it to number two
-- "Puff The Magic Dragon" and Bob Dylan's "Blowin' In The Wind." So
they had six top ten hits. They weren't a 'natural group' in that they
came together on their own. Like the Monkees, they started as a concept
and Albert Grossman basically held cattle calls and cast the group.
Peter Yarrow joined Paul Stookey -- the two played guitars and sang --
and Mary Travers (singer).
Mary's
voice was distinctive and carried them to the top of the folk craze.
When Sonny & Cher, the Mamas the Papas and others moved into folk
rock, the trio tried to as well. The band broke up in 1970 -- did they
think they were the Supremes and/or the Beatles? Mary recorded several
solo albums -- five and none went gold, let alone platinum. She had no
top forty hit. She was the face of the group for most so, yes, that
would have been the only one who could have been a solo success of the
three. She passed away in 2009. That means Paul Stookey, at 87, is now
the only living member of the group.
In
1970, Yarrow was convicted and served three months in prison for taking
"improper liberties" with 14-year-old Barbara Winter. In August 1969,
she had gone with her 17-year-old sister to Yarrow's hotel room in
Washington, DC seeking an autograph. Winter stated that Yarrow answered
the door naked and made her masturbate him until he ejaculated. Yarrow
served three months of a 1–3 year prison sentence.[50][51][52][53][54] He
apologized for the incident, saying that "it was an era of real
indiscretion and mistakes by categorically male performers. I was one of
them. I got nailed. I was wrong. I'm sorry for it."[51]
Yarrow was granted a presidential pardon by Jimmy Carter on January 19, 1981, the day before Carter's presidency ended.[50][51][55] For
decades, Yarrow avoided mention of the assault, but by the early 2000s,
it became a campaign issue for politicians he supports.[53][56][57] In 2004, U.S. Representative Martin Frost of
Texas, a Democrat, canceled a fundraising appearance with Yarrow after
his opponent ran a radio advertisement about Yarrow's offense;[53] in
2013, Republican politicians in New York called on Democratic
congressional candidate Martha Robertson to cancel a scheduled
fundraiser with Yarrow.[56][58] In 2019, he was disinvited from a folk music festival when the organizers were informed of his conviction.[59]
In May 2021, The Washington Post wrote
that "[Yarrow's] pardon by Carter — perhaps the only one in U.S.
history wiping away a conviction for a sexual offense against a child —
escaped scrutiny when it happened. It was granted just hours before the
American hostages in Iran were freed, which captured headlines for
weeks." The same article details other allegations of sexual assault of
minors made against Yarrow.[50]
Tuesday, January 7, 2025. Senator Patty Murray notes the cap on
prescription drugs, Donald Chump whines and whines, one of his lackeys
lies for him (how is that different from any other day), BLUESKY and
much more.
One bright spot in the bleak year of 2024 was the rise
of Bluesky. As someone who relied greatly on Twitter for news and my
career—OK, I may have been somewhat addicted—before Elon Musk bought it
and turned it into a snake pit of neo-Nazi filth, it was nice to see a
Twitter-like replacement rise to relative prominence.
I joined in April 2023 as about the 47,000th user. Today, Bluesky has about 26 million users,
and seems to be growing healthily. It actually has some notable
improvements on Twitter, like the “starter pack” function where users
can put together a group of accounts that one can follow at once (here’s
the starter pack for Prospect writers,
incidentally), or the “nuclear block” where if one participant in a
conversation blocks the other, the entire conversation is zapped. This
greatly cuts down on Twitter’s culture of aggressive pile-ons and abuse.
Unlike any other big platform, Bluesky does not censor posts with
outgoing links. Indeed, it does not have any proprietary “for you”
algorithm, instead defaulting to a traditional reverse-chronological
feed, and allowing users to pick from algorithms that can be developed
by others. This has major implications for publishers: Despite its
modest size, The Guardianreports that Bluesky traffic has already outstripped that from Twitter, and here at the Prospect Bluesky traffic now regularly matches Twitter and is many times that of Facebook.
This ability to share outside the platform is proving so popular that Facebook’s Twitter clone, Threads, has belatedly altered its algorithm
to include more posts from accounts you follow in an attempt to
compete. And this disruption is being done on a shoestring
budget—Bluesky has just 20 employees and about $23 million in funding, as compared to Meta’s 70,000+ workers and $156 billion in annual revenue.
It’s strong evidence that there is a large unmet demand for internet
systems outside of the control of Big Tech monopolists. I don’t know if
there can be a similar option for every walled garden on the
internet—it’s hard to dislodge a giant—but there’s no question that
there’s a lot of pent-up demand.
You can find out a lot on BLUESKY.
David Sirota's always a dirty fool.
Whether attacking the mother of an Iraq War veterans for speaking out
against the Iraq War (and against the senator David worked for) or
threatening us here because we pointed out what David left out when he
attacked Tina in the column -- that the senator she was confronting was
David's mentor and former boss. Sort of a basic disclosure required in
journalism but David thinks he makes up his own rules.
He
has a filthy mouth and a lazy brain and that's why, when he was wrongly
nominated for an Academy Award (for co-writing a piece of crap), I
attended every event ahead of voting to make sure he didn't get the
award -- I attended and took along printed copies of the nasty,
threatening, bullying e-mail he sent me.
It really exposed the true side of him to people who, like most of the world, would otherwise not even know his name.
POST-LEFT
WATCH is on BLUESKY. We've noted them for a couple of months now.
They're someone to watch and follow. They call out the crazy.
Isn't it great when a White man
-- especially a liar like Christian -- wants to tell us about the
targeting of a Black man and to explain it wasn't like what we thought
it was.
He's such a damn liar and such a damn
disgrace to his father. He's also a closeted Socialist but, remember,
we're never supposed to talk about that.
So there he was on Jimmy Dore rewriting history like only a Democrat hating Socialist can.
It's
hard for me to think of his nonsense without thinking of THE NEW YORK
TIMES which launched a huge attack against Dr King and did so long
before The Poor People's Campaign of 1968. THE NEW YORK TIMES not only
attacked him repeatedly -- and is corporate media, therefore a
corporation -- but continued to attack and to denigrate him long after
he was dead.
And they carried the attacks over
onto Coretta. When she died, please remember, NYT had 'playwright' (she
was not that good and she certainly wasn't worthy of more attention than
Coretta Scott King) on the front page, ran three or so columns on her
passing, did an editorial on her, blah blah blah, it never ended.
"Why are you attacking me?"
That's what the paper's sole Black columnist at the time asked me.
Well,
golly gee, you're Black and you have space on the op-ed pages and
you're ignoring the fact that the paper is refusing to run columns --
because there were submissions by big name Black academics -- about
Coretta's passing. You're on the op-ed pages and you're writing garbage
columns when you could be highlighting a pioneering Black woman who
fought for a better America for all and continued her husband's legacy
after he was assassianted.
The guilt trip got
Coretta into a column by Bob. Got her into it. It wasn't about her.
But he worked in for two or three paragraphs.
And of course, Christian brings up the truth and the lies of NYT.
Put
him on a minor media program with a small audience and he's telling the
audience about how Dexter Filkins and John F Burns (NYT 'reporters')
really were in the Green Zone. Dexter especially did whatever the US
military told him. That included, Christian said on air, cancelling
interviews when the US military conveyed that they'd prefer he not speak
to this or that person.
Now if he was going
on something mainstream, he'd say exactly the opposite. And of course
when he was on an in-between program, he'd justify Dexy with comments
like, 'The Dexter Filkins on the pages of THE NEW YORK TIMES is not the
Dexter Filkins in Baghdad' -- meaning that it was the paper's problem
and not Dexter bad journalism.
For those who
don't know, our first weekend online back in 2004 called out Dexter for
lies in print. He won awards for those lies. Is my face red? No.
Because he covered up War Crimes with that article. He covered them
up. They're known now but everyone looks the other way. In 40 years,
people will be calling for the dead reporter to be stripped of the
prizes for his lying.
In forty years when it no longer matters.
But don't expect Christian to tell you any of that.
On
Iraq, this may be our last Iraq snapshot and the title may change to
snapshot tomorrow. I need to check. Don't have time this second
because we have other things still to cover.
BLUESKY is where it's happening.
TWITTER
is for elderly hate mongers -- like Katrina vanden Heuvel of THE NATION
who led the attacks on Kamala. But TWITTER's not the only cesspool. Travis Gettys (RAW STORY) explains:
Facebook's parent company will make changes to its fact-checking to more closely resemble the site formerly known as Twitter.
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced Tuesday morning that content
moderation and other restrictions on speech would be lifted across
Facebook, Instagram and other platforms as Donald Trump returns to the White House, reported Fox News.
"We’re
going to get back to our roots and focus on reducing mistakes,
simplifying our policies and restoring free expression on our
platforms," Zuckerberg said in a video
posted Tuesday morning. "More specifically, we’re going to get rid of
fact-checkers and replace them with Community Notes similar to X,
starting in the U.S."
The company's third-party fact-checking program was put into place
following Trump's first election win to "manage content" and
misinformation on its platforms, which executives conceded was the
result of "political pressure," but they now say that system has "gone
too far."
In other news, Convicted Felon Donald Chump is still being a big titty
baby because he's the continual disappointment that his father loathed
and he's the man that could never satisfy Ivana. He's just an immature
jerk who never grew up and never stopped to grasp that there were other
people on the earth and that they had feelings and the right to expect
to be recognized. Chump doesn't want to appear in person or via the
internet on January 10th when he is to be sentenced. His howler monkey
Steven Cheung (who at 42 looks 97) declared, "The American People
elected President Trump with an overwhelming mandate that demands an
immediate end to the political weaponization of our justice system and
all of the remaining Witch Hunts." Chump lied on official documents.
There's no excuse for that and he can't pardon himself because it's not
federal. Chump is a sleazy, two-bit crook and that's what the record is
going to reflect this week and forever more.
As for a mandate?
No, Steven, the American people didn't give him a mandate.
As
Elaine noted Friday, there is no mandate. 1.8% isn't a mandate.
That's all Chump won by. Ronald Reagan in 1984? He got a mandate. LBJ
in 1964? He got a mandate.
Steven's clearly confused. Must be overwork, right? Can't be personal since he has no personal life.
So
it's work that consumes him. And let us be the first to reveal his
heretofore never discussed acting career. For several years, Steven has
appeared on the series AMERICAN DAD.
Don't know about you, but I think the jewels really make his eyes pop.
Speaking of idiots, Evan Williams (TAG24 NEWS) reports on one, "Republican
Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman had to be shamed into agreeing
to lower US flags to half-mast in honor of the late ex-president Jimmy
Carter." And now note this from the article:
Blakeman's original decision was seen as a response to rants made by Trump on Truth Social last week.
In
response to the US flag potentially being left at half-mast during his
inauguration, Trump said that Democrats "don't love our country" and are
"giddy."
"In
any event, because of the death of President Jimmy Carter, the Flag
may, for the first time ever during an Inauguration of a future
President, be at half-mast," Trump said.
Democrats don't love our country?
He
was never fit to be president. He's a mad sociopath who is not fit to
represent the American people and who only knows how to sew division.
Which makes him the ultimate LOVE CONNECTION for Elon Musk, right?
Yesterday
was many things including the fourth year anniversary of the treasonous
attack on our country. Rachel Maddow addressed that last night on
MSNBC.
Let's wind down with this from Senator Patty Murray's office:
70,000+ seniors in Washington state, 4.5 million seniors
nationwide will save hundreds or thousands of dollars each year thanks
to the new annual cap on out-of-pocket prescription drug costs for folks
on Medicare Part D
***PHOTOS AND B-ROLL OF THURSDAY’S PRESS CONFERENCE AVAILABLE HERE***
In case you missed it: on January 1, a new provision
that Democrats in Congress got signed into law went into effect,
capping out-of-pocket prescription drug costs for seniors with a
Medicare prescription drug plan at $2,000 a year. On Thursday, U.S.
Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), a senior member and former Chair of the
Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, joined
U.S. Representative Kim Schrier, M.D. (D-WA-08) at Northaven Senior
Living in Seattle to highlight the new costs savings for millions of
seniors.
The new cap is thanks to the Inflation Reduction Act Democrats
passed through Congress in 2022—that every single Republican voted
against—and it means millions of seniors will pay significantly less for
their prescription drugs this year, lowering costs for families and
giving them more breathing room.
“Starting January 1st, anyone with a Medicare prescription
drug plan—also known as Medicare Part D—now has their out-of-pocket drug
costs capped at two thousand dollars each year. That’s because of a law
Democrats passed—the Inflation Reduction Act—that did all sorts of
things to lower health care costs and make it cheaper and easier for
folks to get the medications they need,” said Senator Murray.“As
everyone knows, high drug prices come with other painful costs—like
stress over how to make ends meet, or what bills to skip, in order to
fill a prescription, or whether to take the risk of rationing
medication. These are impossible choices that no one should ever have to
make. But they’re the reality for so many people, and so many seniors
especially. And make no mistake, when prescription drugs are too
expensive for people to afford—that’s dangerous. Because even the best,
most effective medication can’t do someone any good if they can’t afford
to get it.”
Medicare Part D—a voluntary program that helps pay for prescription
drugs for people with Medicare—provides prescription drug coverage for
nearly 56 million Americans. More than 4.5 million
older Americans enrolled in Part D are estimated to benefit from the
new out-of-pocket spending cap that took effect January 1, 2025.
Approximately 1.4 million Part D enrollees
who reach the new out-of-pocket cap between 2025 and 2029 will see
annual savings of $1,000 or more, and just over 420,000 will see savings
of more than $3,000. In Washington state, at least 70,000 seniors are expected to see these new savings—nearly $1,900 in 2025—and that number will steadily increase over time.
The $2,000 annual cap is just one of the many actions Democrats took to lower prescription drug costs in the Inflation Reduction Act.
Most notably, the law capped the cost of insulin for patients on
Medicare at $35/month—which went into effect January 1, 2023—and it
empowered Medicare to negotiate lower prescription drug prices for the
first time ever.
In August, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) announced negotiated drug prices
for ten commonly-used drugs in the first cycle of negotiations. The
new, lower negotiated prices will go into effect on January 1, 2026, and
will lower the prices people pay for some of the most common and
expensive prescription drugs that treat heart disease, cancer, diabetes,
blood clots, and more.
Allowing Medicare to negotiate prescription drug costs is expected
to save American taxpayers $6 billion, with people enrolled in Medicare
expected to save $1.5 billion in out-of-pocket costs in 2026 alone. 15
to 20 more drugs will be added to the negotiating table every year
moving forward – all thanks to Democrats’ Inflation Reduction Act.
See coverage of the landmark new prescription drug cap below:
Seniors on Medicare Part D will never pay more than $2,000
out-of-pocket for prescription drugs annually, thanks to a provision in
the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act which takes effect this year. The new
benefit for seniors on Medicare Part D will cap out-of-pocket
prescription drug costs at $2,000 per year. Once they reach this dollar
amount, they will automatically receive “catastrophic coverage,” which
means all out-of-pocket costs for Part D drugs will be covered through
the rest of the year. […]
In Washington state alone, 70,000 enrollees will save nearly $1,900 in 2025, with the number of beneficiaries growing over time.
“[It’s] a change that will save millions of people, hundreds or
thousands of dollars on their prescription medications, every year from
now on,” said U.S. Senator Patty Murray, who is a senior member of the
Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. “There is more
to this story than just numbers—because as everyone knows, high drug
prices come with other painful costs. Like stress over how to make ends
meet, or what bills to skip, in order to fill a prescription, or whether
to take the risk of rationing medication.” […]
“This cap means I can afford my medications without having to cut
back on essentials like food or utilities,” said Katherine O’Hara, a
local senior who is on Medicare.
Stephan Gerhardt, who lives with dystonia and degenerative disc disease, also praised the change.
“One of my anti-inflammatory medications isn’t covered by my
insurance, but luckily, it only costs $45 a bottle and lasts six
months,” Gerhardt said. “I’m fortunate compared to others.”
Gerhardt, who has been on Medicare for over a decade due to his
disabilities, said the new law will help many seniors in his community
avoid tough choices between essential needs.
“People I know often have to decide: ‘Do I eat, pay rent, or take my
meds?’” said Gerhardt. “Almost everybody will choose to pay rent because
they can’t survive being homeless; and then it’s, ‘How do I figure out
food?’”
“This is life-changing for folks who can’t afford their medications,”
said Gerhardt. “It reduces the strain on individuals and the healthcare
system. If people can afford their medications, they’re less likely to
end up in emergency rooms, which costs everyone more in the long run.”
Despite the bipartisan benefits, every Republican in Congress voted
against the Inflation Reduction Act, a point highlighted by Murray. She
warned of potential future efforts to repeal the law.
“This is about making life more affordable and ensuring no one has to
risk their health because they can’t afford medication,” Murray said.
“The President-Elect has talked about cutting everything, so he’s got
everything in front of him, and we’re going to make sure this is not one
he goes after.”
Sen. Patty Murray held a press conference Thursday in light of a cap
on prescription drug costs for some on Medicare going into effect.
Out-of-pocket costs for prescription medications will be capped at
$2,000 a year for seniors on Medicare Part D. Part D is a voluntary
program that pays for prescription drug medication that covers nearly 56
million Americans.
The change was included in the Inflation Reduction Act that was passed in Congress in August of 2022. […]
“As everyone knows, high drug prices cause other painful costs, like
stress over how to make ends meet, or what bills they needed to skip in
order to take a prescription, or whether to take the risk of rationing
medication,” Murray said. “Those are impossible choices that no one
should ever have to make, but they’re the reality for many people and
many seniors.”
Other provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act also take aim at drug
costs for people with Medicare. The cost of insulin is capped at $35 a
month and recommended vaccines like the flu, shingles, COVID-19 and RSV
are free to everyone with Medicare Part D, according to U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services.
The convicted felon is headed back to the
White House because people are stupid and racist. A functioning society
would never have allowed the crook's name to go on the ballot. But
then, we have a corrupt Supreme Court that rules capriciously and
ignores precedent so that's how we end up with the crook headed back to
the White House. And he and his fellow traitors think they shouldn't
have to pay for their actions. They committed treason. They all should
have faced a firing squad. Josephine Harvey (HUFFINGTON POST) notes:
A
former U.S. Capitol Police officer who suffered serious injuries in the
Jan. 6 insurrection reflected on his trauma and implored Donald Trump
not to pardon his attackers in a New York Times op-ed marking four years since the violence.
Former Sgt. Aquilino Gonell, who left the police force in
2022 due to the mental and physical damage he sustained on Jan. 6,
2021, recalled, “I thought I was going to die and never make it home to
see my wife and young son” in the article published Sunday, the eve of
the anniversary.
“Over the last four years, it’s been devastating to me to hear Donald Trump repeat his promise to pardon insurrectionists on the first day he’s back in office,” he wrote, noting that Trump has referred to those convicted as “hostages” and “peaceful protesters.”
“But
all of us who were there and anyone who watched on TV know that those
who stormed the Capitol were not peaceful protesters,” Gonnell said.
“Pardoning them would be an outrageous mistake, one that could mean
about 800 convicted criminals will be back on the street.”
He's
exactly right. I never want to hear a damn word out of one of those
MAGA loons about law and order Again, they should have all faced a
public execution for their treason.
And
I don't need to hear namby pamby Corrupt Court Chief Roberts whining
about how people are calling his Court out. We're calling it out
because you're a damn liar, Roberts. We're calling it out for trash
'verdicts' like DOBBS. You're the ones refusing to ensure equality for
all citizens, stop acting like we're in the wrong when it's you who
refused to follow precedent.
Monday, January 6, 2025. We're not tolerating political closets and
let's outline exactly how much damage those closeted, non-Democrats did
to the 2024 election while pretending that they were Democrats.
Friday, we were talking about the way forward (you can also refer to Wednesday's "2024: The Year of Betrayal From Inside The Left")
and how we use this platform this year. We're going to expand on that
but two videos that went up here yesterday we are going to note at the
top.
First, THE MAJORITY REPORT.
Where
are we going to take the show? Sam asks that and it's something anyone
with a platform should be asking. Here? We're not plaforming liars.
Last night, in "A crazy mistakes herself for Paul Revere,"
we noted crazy Jessica Denson. We noted her before when she was with
another outlet -- they have parted ways as she constantly insists, and
we noted her a week or so after the election and noted that I was not
interested in election lies. She was going to get the results
overturned because she knew this or she knew that. And I noted that I
would love for the results to be different but that they weren't. And I
noted that different results would mean we lived in a far less racist
country than we do.
Last night, I get on, at a party,
to do an entry and the public e-mail account is swamped with over 70
e-mails insisting that Jessica's latest video has to be covered. It was
garbage and I outlined why. We are done with her.
That's not
the first person time we've had to wash out hands of people who are
self-defeating. Another group like that was noted by Rebecca in "the oklahoma trash behind 'i've had it' podcast" on Friday.
We're also not noting you if you're in a political
closet. Meaning? If I know you're not a Democrat but you're lying
online that you are, I'm not interested in you. DEMOCRACY NOW! brought
on one Socialist after another to slam Kamala during the general
election and they presented as Democrat. That's how they lie.
There's
nothing wrong being a Socialist. But a Socialist doesn't like
Democrats. That's why you see so much praise for Bernie Sanders. The
decades of racism, for example, slid right by. It takes a Black
YOUTUBER -- such as Roland Martin -- to tell the truth about Bernie that
not White YOUTUBER wants to. The left outlets attacked Kamala. But
they found time -- COMMON DREAMS, THE NATION, DEMOCRACY NOW!, THE
PROGRESSIVE, etc -- to praise Tim Walz? Why? They never told you and
they want us to not know what happened or to not talk about it. Now.
But in August Democratic Socialists of America bragged to the press --
and at their Twitter feed -- that they got Tim Walz on the ticket!!!! He
was their guy!!!! (Sabby Sabs might get noted again because, if you
look, she called them out in a response on that official Tweet.)
He
was a lousy candidate. The debate between vice presidential nominees
is always about drawing blood. Tim did not just fail to draw blood, he
was an embarrassment. Sweating on camera, looking like a stooge, not
knowing what word he was about to say next as he struggle to speak. An
embarrassment.
Now ask yourself why these same outlets
didn't tell you that? Because he was their guy. They, DSA insisted,
got him on the ticket.
And they shielded him from any
press critiques. Rebecca was right, the governor o Kentucky was the way
to go. Not some looney tune who made Elmer Fudd look like a genius.
And that's before we get into all the lies -- or, if you prefer,
"whoppers" -- he kept telling during the campaign. We'll go into this
more, I'm sure as the year goes along.
And we'll
probably touch again on the SEP. I've noted them, we've noted their
publication, WSWS. They are Socialists. I have no problem with
Socialists. I do have a problem with Socialists who want to pretend
that they're Democrats. Say what you are. The reason that they won't
is because they know that'll cut their audience down and also make their
arguments/lies be taken less seriously.
Some people
get this, some people don't. Kamala lost because of voter suppression.
Outlets on the left elected to attack her daily for three months
solid. They repeated lies about her -- Amy Goodman made a point to air
the attack on Kamala's race from Donald Trump repeatedly and only one
time did she bring on a guest to refute it. They knew what they were
doing and you need to know what they did and what they'll do again.
Because of their actions, the electoral college with give the presidency to Chump later today.
We can't afford them.
And
if you're feeling sorry for the fake asses -- include Jill Stein in
that --we can go over the debate that the fake ass Uncommitted
'movement' carried out. We can go over how they had Jill and Cornel
there for a debate. And we can go over how they refused to allow the
SEP's presidential candidate to be on that stage. How they lied to the
SEP and claimed there would be another event but there wasn't. The
closet cases just didn't want an out Socialist on the stage.
We
may also go into how certain Palestinian-Americas did the front work
for Uncommitted while the true organizers like Norman Solomon hid in the
background.
Does it matter?
Second, I said two videos, Hal Sparks.
Cenk and Ana.
Ana says she didn't even vote for president.
Hmm.
Well the thing here is the grift. And the thing here is that the grift is not new.
I
had a good friend decades ago who I haven't spoken to since because he
was a Socialist who moved over to the right wing. He was hurt and
didn't do it for money -- move over to the right -- but he stayed there
because of the money. And I've seen that over and over.
But they lied all along because they weren't Democrats, they were Socialists.
Ana
got a JACOBIN podcast which people want to forget but it happened and
it is why JACOBIN doesn't want to call her out on her right wing drift
because she knows a little too much about Socialists in closets.
They
let Ana attack Katie Halper (also a Socialist) on their own podcast.
They didn't drop her then. Even though she attacked Katie in a podcast
where Ana's guest was Katie's co-host.
And that's
another reason to dislike Katie. She was attacked and she didn't say a
word. Acted like it didn't happen, acted like Nacho Noodlers or
whatever the idiot's name was, hadn't joined Ana in attacking her.
She's pathetic.
But
the point here is, right now everyone's noting how badly Cenk and Ana
are betraying the Democratic Party and how they are stabbing it.
But
people are still pretending that those two were Democrats. They were
not. They're angry Socialists that are pimping the right wing. The Max
Blumenthal 'left.'
They are not helping the Democratic Party.
We'll
note criticism in 2025 of the Democrats. I'm sure I'll have plenty
myself, but we'll note WSWS and others as well. They can be of the left
and we'll note them. What we won't note is political closet cases
because while we're trying to have an honest conversation, they're
trying to trick and lie -- that's why they hide in their political
closets.
If those who invested so much into Cenk and
Ana over the years had know that the two were not Democrats, that they
were Socialists, Cenk and Ana wouldn't have gotten away with as much.
Which
brings us to the fake assery of BREAKING POINTS. Apparently, even they
realize that they went too far too early. Which is why they're now
burying a video they posted over the weekend. You can't find it at
their YOUTUBE site. But it existed and Socialist -- not Democrat --
Briahna Joy Gray was the guest and she Tweeted about it:
Will the Democrats learn anything from their 2024 defeat?
@briebriejoy
says don’t count on it.
“They will do this quick mea culpa and then it’s going to be back to business as usual”
WATCH: http://youtu.be/cMeCKzOAmKM
Imagine that, before Chump's even declared the victor in
the election, BREAKING POINTS is already telling you that Dems will sell
out.
Why is that?
Because they're not Democrats.
People
wrongly thing because of creepy guy being a Republican, that the show
is about a Republican and a Democrat having conversations. It's a
bigger fake assery than CROSSFIRE on CNN ever was.
We
stopped noting them because Saagar was scapegoating gay men (glass
houses?) over Monkeypox and then Krystal did her order that all must
support Marianne Williamson -- you know, Krystal and Kyle's wedding
guest that neither wanted you to know that fact?
I'm
tired of liars. Bri is not a Democrats. She's a Socialist. So she was
brought on to attack the Dems and by not explaining who she really is,
it comes off much differently to the viewers. Titsy another Socialist.
I'm glad she finally learned to wear a bra. I know Rania's streaming
numbers dropped when she did but no one needed her delivering 'news' in
tight shirts, no bra while she jumped around. Yes, she really was that
pathetic. And who is she with now?
Oh, that's right: BREAKING POINTS.
Rania is not a Democrat. And let's go to one of her Tweets at random.
This is what Trump surrogates told Arabs in Dearborn, while Harris refused to even meet with them and kept insulting them.
It’s likely untrue, but his campaign repeatedly told Arab Americans they would stop the wars.
So
if you want to be mad at someone, be mad at the Democratic Party for
appealing to racists and republicans instead of their actual base and
those hurting from a Democrat sponsored genocide.
Quote
Rania Khalek
@RaniaKhalek
·
Nov 1, 2024
At
a Trump event in Dearborn, Michigan former Acting Director of National
Intelligence Richard Grenell told me Trump will not appount Mike Pompeo
or John Bolton or Jared Kushner to any role and said Amos Hochstein
& Brett McGurk would get the boot.
10:56 AM · Nov 6, 2024
·
48.3K
Views
Rania
lies about who she is politically and lies about everything. Kamala
Harris did meet with Palestinian-Americans -- including Rashida Tlaib's
sister. But there's Rania lying because a Socialist will tear apart a
Democrat with lies. And many people know that which is why so many
Socialists on the left lie about who and what they really are.
But
look at that Tweet within a Tweet. Rania Tweeted it. As truth. She
Tweeted Trump's lie as truth. That he would be better for Palestine.
Starting get why she had to use her (average size) breasts for attention for most of her career?
They're
liars and we can't afford them. So they're not going to be noted.
BREAKING POINTS is a Socialist platform that hides who they really are.
They have right-wing Republican hosts who attack the Democratic Party
and then they bring on the 'left' to attack the Democratic Party and
never once let you know that these people are not Democrats.
It's a grift and it's a con.
And
you're seeing the end results right now with Cenk and Ana. This is how
it ends. We don't need to repeat this in 2028 or, for that matter,
2026. It's time to send a message that we will not let them stay in the
closet and misrepresent who they actually are as they try to destroy
the Democratic Party.
No.
Not going to happen.
And by eliminating the liars, we might be able to have an honest conversation.
That idiot James Carville is yammering away with more lies. I just
wonder when can we get honest about this past election? C.I.'s "2024: The Year of Betrayal From Inside The Left"
delivered a ton of honesty. At one point, before she edited it down
(to a little over 11,000 words), she talked about the percentage and
how people were being ahistorical about it to argue for their nonsense
-- 'Dems should turn their back on trans rights!' and other nonsense.
So let's talk about that.
Let's start by noting the AP count for 2024's presidential election popular vote and we're looking at the percentage:
75,019,257 votes (48.4%) -- Kamala Harris
77,303,573 votes (49.9%) -- Donald Trump
1.5%. That was the percentage that Chump won by.
Let's drop back to 2004:
Popular vote
62,040,610
59,028,444
Percentage
50.7%
48.3%
50.7% to 48.3%
Do you remember that? Bully Boy Bush won. John Kerry lost to him by 2.4%
Let's to back another 20 years.
Popular vote
54,455,472
37,577,352
Percentage
58.8%
40.6%
Ronald Reagan won. He got 58.8% of the vote to Mondale's 40.6%. Reagan won by 18.2%
Popular vote
43,129,040
27,175,754
Percentage
61.1%
38.5%
LBJ won with 61% of the vote. That's 22.6% that he beat Barry Goldwater by.
Are you getting the point yet? We're focusing on percentages because they don't change. The number of those voting.
Chump won. That's the story at the end of the day and I'm not trying to pretend it's not.
But
the hand wringing that's taking place and the nonsense of Seth Moulton,
James Carville and others is not about the results. If we're talking
about results, the totals don't call for massive changes.
Chump
is not going to make our lives better. Four years from now, the
country will want a new direction. That includes those who voted for
Trump.
Kamala got 1.5% less votes. The most likely
reason for that is because of the non-stop attacks that THE NATION,
COMMON DREAMS, THE PROGRESSIVE, DEMOCRACY NOW! and others carried out on
Kamala from August through the end of October. It's past time for that
to be addressed.
Kamala performed amazingly
well considering that elements of the left media -- non-Democrats --
worked to dampen enthusiasm for her campaign every single day. That's
reality. And that can never happen again.