Category Archives: Grey Lady

Free Speech, Nazi style

Free speech is crucial to informed debate in a democracy. Without the right to freely exchange ideas, to speak and write freely without government prosecution, we’re pretty much done as a democracy.

Totally free speech is a double edged sword, of course, since Nazis and Klansmen are as free as anyone else to speak publicly as they see fit. Our First Amendment prevents the government from making any law infringing our right to say or write pretty much anything we want (unless we are actively causing violence). It reads:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

They do this in a manner that is much clearer and more unmistakable than, say, in the Second Amendment which reads:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Aside from the use of the passive voice, and the context of a well regulated militia (conveniently omitted by most gun lovers), the gun amendment is much more squishy and subject to interpretation as to regulation than the freedom of religion, speech, the press and our right to peacefully assemble amendment.

Tech giant Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who famously told his executives that “you go to the mat” if the government tries to regulate Facebook in any way, spoke out recently (in a letter to pugnacious dickhead Jim Jordan, no less) against pressure he claims to have received from the Biden administration to monitor and flag pernicious lies that spread virally on Facebook.  Zuckerberg’s position is the same as virtually any working billionaire’s — you do whatever is necessary to prevent any government action that can lessen your profits, even by a penny.

Note the elegance of that Fox headline: Zuckerberg “admits” Biden is persecuting him and trying to force him to censor Americans.

Biden responded that he was asking all social media giants to behave as responsible citizens by flagging harmful lies that kill people. Facebook was among tech giants that allowed, among other things, countless viral videos touting the alleged harmfulness of the Covid vaccine that Trump fast-tracked with Operation Warp Speed. Biden pointed out that the deadly Covid pandemic is now only killing the unvaccinated. How much money would it cost Zuckerberg to post warnings on deadly lies embraced by millions because they show up over and over in a social media feed?

Who gives a fuck?

Free speech isn’t free, of course. It has to be fought for, against a formidable enemy — the brutal, incendiary, viral lie — as powerful as free speech itself.

When the government attempts to curb lies, powerful liars are outraged. They cite their right to say whatever they please, as guaranteed by the First Amendment. Unfettered free speech, particularly when it goes viral, is supremely useful for climbing to power. Once in power, Nazi free speech is famously whatever the fucking Fuhrer, and his handlers, say it is.

In late April [2022], the Department of Homeland Security announced the creation of the Disinformation Governance Board, whose mission would be recommending best practices to counter disinformation related to homeland security. The head of this board, Nina Jankowicz [1], was cyberbullied until she resigned. Operations of the board were promptly “suspended”. As far as I’m aware, the cyberbullies prevailed.

Biden subsequently opened an office, the White House Task Force to Address Online Harassment and Abuse, to combat the pernicious threat of vicious “social media” and specifically to police cyberbullies who make gender-based attacks. Not much has been reported about the task force since it was launched with some fanfare in June of 2022.

Now Zuckerberg is bitching again about his right to be the number one richest man in history, which, weighed against the health of our Nazi besieged democracy, is the only thing that counts to a billionaire who, by definition, can never have enough.

I’ll leave you with an example of free speech from the New York Times. See if you can spot the difference in these two paragraphs, the lead paragraph in a recent article about “MAGA jurisprudence” (an oxymoron if there ever was one).

As for freedom of the press, so necessary to protect democracy that the founders chose to protect the press in the First Amendment, they have a right to publish any opinion they choose, even in news articles. I’ve tweaked one sentence in this New York Times first paragraph to make it more accurate. See if you can spot the sentence I fixed:

The Supreme Court term that ended this summer delivered a number of big wins for traditional conservative causes. The court made it easier to challenge federal regulations. It made it harder to prosecute former presidents who commit crimes while in office. And it delivered another decision that expanded the rights of gun enthusiasts.

The original:

The Supreme Court term that ended this summer delivered a number of big wins for traditional conservative causes. The court made it easier to challenge federal regulations. It made it harder to prosecute former presidents. And it delivered another decision that expanded the rights of gun enthusiasts. 

Let’s leave aside that the editorial frame of “traditional conservative causes” is a poor description of these truly radical, reactionary decisions.

“It made it harder to prosecute former presidents” is a true statement, as far as it goes. A more accurate statement, one that better informs and underscores the revolutionary nature of the Supreme Court’s radical rightwing decision in Trump v. United States is: “It made it harder to prosecute former presidents who commit crimes in office.”

Freedom of fucking speech, sisters and brothers, mind that shit carefully.

[1] She gives examples of free speech she was treated to while heading the Disinformation Governing Board:

And then beyond that, there were calls to create deepfake pornography of me and then the violent threats, which were numerous. And I was reporting at least one a day to the department for the three weeks that this campaign was going on before I resigned – things like, go hang yourself, you leftist, C-word. You’re the new Goebbels; will you meet the same end? Of course, Goebbels killed himself. One person said, this is a hill to die on; get ready – we will not tolerate this. And this, to me, seems to have come directly from a tweet that Representative Lauren Boebert sent out saying that this was Stalinist or Mao level, and this was a hill to die on, so directly echoing her language and the threat. People saying, you will regret this. Kill yourself, you subhuman sack of S-word. You and your F-ing family should be sent to Russia to be killed. Hey – I don’t know how to describe this word, a pejorative for a woman – quit And then beyond that, there were calls to create deepfake pornography of me and then the violent threats, which were numerous. And I was reporting at least one a day to the department for the three weeks that this campaign was going on before I resigned – things like, go hang yourself, you leftist, C-word. You’re the new Goebbels; will you meet the same end? Of course, Goebbels killed himself. One person said, this is a hill to die on; get ready – we will not tolerate this. And this, to me, seems to have come directly from a tweet that Representative Lauren Boebert sent out saying that this was Stalinist or Mao level, and this was a hill to die on, so directly echoing her language and the threat. People saying, you will regret this. Kill yourself, you subhuman sack of S-word. You and your F-ing family should be sent to Russia to be killed. Hey – I don’t know how to describe this word, a pejorative for a woman – quit your job before we destroy your life. Everything you’ve ever cared about will be taken from you. And you’re nothing but a freaking liar. And you’re going to pay for it with a heavy price, you stupid B-word, before we destroy your life. Everything you’ve ever cared about will be taken from you. And you’re nothing but a freaking liar. And you’re going to pay for it with a heavy price, you stupid B-word. That’s just a few of them. (source)

The Beer Hall Putsch, redux

In 1923 Hitler and a mob of angry, violent, armed supporters in Munich attempted to seize control of Germany in a riot known as the Beer Hall Putsch [1].  The attempted revolution failed, fifteen Nazis were killed along with four policeman and a bystander.   The failed coup made Hitler an international star, thanks to endless speeches he was allowed to make during his trial, the right wing press in Germany and a sympathetic judge who sentenced him to five years for treason and ultimately had him serve nine months.  During that gestation period Hitler lived as a guest of the state, dictated his infamous autobiography to two co-conspirators and changed tactics.  Now he would sway public opinion by pioneering and perfecting Nazi propaganda, relentless, organized, incendiary lies to inspire fear and hatred, come to power legally, and become the Adolf Hitler of destiny.

Ten years of hard work later the Nazi motherfucker and his party won just over 37% of the vote, made a coalition with old school German reactionaries who believed they could  control Hitler, and the rest, as they say, is history.  Germans wouldn’t have to vote again during the twelve long years of the Thousand Year Reich.  Shortly after being named chancellor Hitler watched the Reichstag, the German parliament, go up in flames.  Invoking the Enabling Act of the Weimar constitution he seized emergency powers.  He had opponents beaten, imprisoned, tortured and killed.  He had German society reorganized so that only Nazis held positions of power and respect.  Six years later he invaded Poland, beginning the world war he accused the Jews of arranging.

My point is that Nazis tirelessly play the long game. It is the same with super-wealthy American reactionaries who would be very happy with a compliant dictator to enforce their privileges in perpetuity.

What do you need to make sure your power will be absolute and eternal in a democracy controlled by “majoritarian tyranny”? Select a super-majority of the nine judges who decide the limits of democratic power and individual rights.

How do you gain control of the Supreme Court? Create a well-funded right wing judicial fraternity, as part of a network of influential public relations outfits, recruit bright young reactionaries in law school, get them good jobs, promote them, have them appointed to the federal courts whenever possible. These right wing judges will in turn hire younger fraternity brothers and be promoted themselves. Eventually, through parliamentary chicanery, six of these ideologically pure members of the glorious society will be in place on the nation’s highest court to make rulings that support their patrons and render government oversight and freedom for most people vestiges of a failed experiment.

Perfect Donald and his followers are of great use to this reactionary movement. He has the Hitlerian charisma, to his followers, to dominate corporate media and garner tens of millions of votes. More important, he has no real ideas about anything except aggrandizing himself. Write him a detailed plan that makes him dictator and he’s good. He wants to be dictator, even if only on day one and he is a corrupt “transactional” man willing to compromise on any belief for a price and in order to “win”.

A popular TV savvy Nazi motherfucker with corporate media fawning over his every demented pronouncement, Donald really is a great figurehead for Charles Koch and friends, no matter how much many of them might detest him personally. If you’re a fascist by nature you work with the Hitler history gives you, I suppose. It is also wonderful (to the Kochtopus) that the New York Times and other respected news brands hold two standards, one for America’s favorite semi-coherent Nazi fuck, another much higher one for anyone who opposes him. Here’s the Grey Lady today, number one headline going into the Democratic convention:

Way down the page we read:

God bless these United Shayssssh.

What, me worry?

[1] Wikipedia:

The Beer Hall Putsch, also known as the Munich Putsch,[1][note 1] was a failed coup d’état by Nazi Party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei or NSDAP) leader Adolf Hitler, Generalquartiermeister Erich Ludendorff and other Kampfbund leaders in Munich, Bavaria, on 8–9 November 1923, during the Weimar Republic. Approximately two thousand Nazis marched on the Feldherrnhalle, in the city centre, but were confronted by a police cordon, which resulted in the deaths of 15 Nazis, four police officers, and one bystander.[2][3]

Hitler escaped immediate arrest and was spirited off to safety in the countryside. After two days, he was arrested and charged with treason.[4]

The putsch brought Hitler to the attention of the German nation for the first time and generated front-page headlines in newspapers around the world. His arrest was followed by a 24-day trial, which was widely publicised and gave him a platform to express his nationalist sentiments. Hitler was found guilty of treason and sentenced to five years in Landsberg Prison,[note 2] where he dictated Mein Kampf to fellow prisoners Emil Maurice and Rudolf Hess. On 20 December 1924, having served only nine months, Hitler was released.[5][6] Once released, Hitler redirected his focus towards obtaining power through legal means rather than by revolution or force, and accordingly changed his tactics, further developing Nazi propaganda.[7]

Louis DeJoy, stand back and stand by, redux

While corporate media, and panicking Democrats, are obsessed over why a successful president refuses to step aside even though wealthy donors are threatening to withhold $90,000,000 in pledged campaign funds unless he does (NY Times headline today), I am wondering about a more direct threat in the 2024 election.

Consider the ease with which a MAGA “public servant” with the power to easily do so, can nullify millions of mail in ballots by simply delaying their delivery for a few weeks, after four years of practice with random, inexplicable nationwide month-long delays in mail delivery.

Do you trust a Postmaster appointed by the “transactional” Orange Quid Pro Quo, a man who donated $2,500,000 to Trump and the RNC in 2016, to deliver millions of mail-in ballots in time to be counted in 2024? Personally, I’d like to see a little oversight of this smug, smirking corporate fucker.

The media, we should note, is silent about the threat DeJoy’s nationwide mail slow-downs pose for an election expected to be unaccountably close. Google him, not much recently written about the arrogant dickhead, in spite of years of controversy, ethics probes, Congressional hearings. The watchdog groups I’ve contacted in the last few weeks are silent, my elected officials are silent, in spite of repeated contacts with them. I suppose there will be media silence, if Trump manages to engineer an Electoral College victory, when millions of undelivered votes are discovered right before the Dictator on Day One is sworn in for his revenge tour.

Which is more important for the outcome, for the future of democracy, endless criticism of the effective incumbent because he is old and walks like an old man, or stopping a massive voter suppression scheme conducted under color of law?

Here are the two most recent media pieces about Trump megadonor Postmaster Louis DeJoy. The first is a July 8 op ed by DeJoy himself, published in Jeff Bezos’ Washington Post. All I was able to read (not climbing that particular paywall) was this wonderful opening:

Louis DeJoy is the postmaster general. I am fascinated by the U.S. Postal Service and its opportunities to serve the American people. Each day, our 640,000 employees operate 32,000 retail and …

The only other recent update on the pugnacious, partisan Postmaster is this report about the Postal Regulatory Commission urging DeJoy to put off his experiments with more budget cuts and policy changes to slow mail delivery until after the 2024 election. Predictably, the arrogant dickhead is doing what the hardcore right wing always does, staying the course.

Meanwhile, corporate media, keep doing your job to advance the interests of corporate persons. Those judicially created psychopaths are people too, with feelings, just like real, God-created people!

And now, let’s repeat, with the Orange Polyp:

Louis DeJoy, stand back and stand by.

How to elect a Nazi, NY Times edition

Here are the top four New York Times headlines today. The paper’s wealthy (fourth generation wealth, the way it’s done by our greatest citizens) chairman and publisher, 43 year old “Dash” Sulzberger, is reportedly furious that Biden, after the NY Times ran dozens front page articles focusing on Biden’s disqualifying age, DEFIED their requests for a sit-down interview. The Journal of Record is now doing everything in its considerable power to create doubt about Biden’s competence and stoke a controversy that can only help Charles Koch, Leonard Leo, Sammy “My Wife has a right to do whatever she wants, libtards!” Alito and friends win the upcoming presidential election.

Note the even-handed placement of an article musing about why a would-be dictator would lie about a controversial, unpopular and largely insane public blueprint for his dictatorship.

I once called this newspaper the Grey Skank, which I realize now is an insult to skanks. My apologies, skanks.

Then, because the Journal of Record always tell the whole story with nuance, without bias or slant, this hard-hitting editorial warning against the danger of the candidate they are doing so much to help.

Here’s a bit of their moralizing, complete with quickly doubling back to questions about Biden’s unfitness and the urgent need for responsible, terrified Democratic big donors to replace him:

Mr. Trump has shown a character unworthy of the responsibilities of the presidency. He has demonstrated an utter lack of respect for the Constitution, the rule of law and the American people. Instead of a cogent vision for the country’s future, Mr. Trump is animated by a thirst for political power: to use the levers of government to advance his interests, satisfy his impulses and exact retribution against those who he thinks have wronged him.

He is, quite simply, unfit to lead.

The Democrats are rightly engaged in their own debate about whether President Biden is the right person to carry the party’s nomination into the election, given widespread concerns among voters about his age-related fitness. This debate is so intense because of legitimate concerns that Mr. Trump may present a danger to the country, its strength, security and national character — and that a compelling Democratic alternative is the only thing that would prevent his return to power.

Mr. Trump, as the NY Times puts it with it’s trademark restraint, MAY PRESENT A DANGER TO THE COUNTRY. If you say so, Grey Corporatist Coprophage [1].

Check the Grey Hag a few hours later and you will see these four top stories (Project 2025 query omitted in favor of another headline questioning Biden’s competency). Way to go, fuckheads.

[1] Any living, or judicially created, organism that feeds on feces or fecal matter.

Know your enemy

The billionaire reactionaries behind fearsome  MAGA figurehead Donald Trump have commissioned a 900 plus page manifesto which is only now beginning to get attention.   It is called Project 2025.  It is the blueprint for an America where the clock is turned back to around 1919 (before women could vote, the year of Red Summer  when violent reprisals by lynch mobs against returning Black WWI veterans skyrocketed).

Here is a short summary of some of its plans, put together by Robert Reich.

Naturally the Lying Orange Polyp has tried to distance himself from the plan.  He claims to know nothing about it. 

It turns out that 23 of the 37 authors of the reactionary wet dream were members of his administration.   Here is a short list of several of them.

Of course, it is no surprise that America’s Greatest Liar would lie about it.  He claimed not to know who his supporter David Duke was.  He claimed to know nothing about the violent militias he later called on for his Hail Mary attempt to violently stay in office on January 6th.   He claimed never to have had sex with a porn star he paid $130,000 to, in a complicated scheme to avoid detection, to remain silent about their brief, weird sexual liaison.  He claimed never to have had sex with the woman who, in his telling,  flirted with him in a department store who he then raped, and was found civilly liable for raping (untrue, merely sexually assaulting, as he will point out).   After losing two defamation cases she brought against him, he continues to call her a liar.   There are 30,000 plus more examples from his four years in office.

The sickening surprise is the corporate media’s exclusive focus on the supposedly disqualifying age of a candidate three years older than the Orange Polyp.  The New York Times today leads with several headlines calling Biden’s fitness to run into question:

Resilience Has Fueled Biden’s Career. But So Has Defiance. (He has repeatedly defied NY Times requests for an exclusive interview)

A Senate Democrat Says Biden Must “Do More” to Assuage Voter Concerns. (Joe Manchin still a Democrat? Kirsten Synema?)

Election updates:  President Biden spoke at a Philadelphia church, as calls continued for him to quit the race. (see, e.g., NY Times editorial calling for him to be forcibly removed as candidate)

As New York Times headlines continued to hammer home, Biden has always been defiant, a Democratic Senator says he’s still not convinced Biden can be president, calls continue for him to quit.

Any mention of Trump? Funny you should ask, it’s the very next headline.

The process of choosing a running mate for Donald Trump has created a new roster of rising Republicans.

Any word about Trump’s fitness to be MAGA’s retribution, carry out revenge on Rosie O’Donnell and others on his enemies list, bolstered by preemptive Supreme Court immunity for criminal acts he deems necessary for “bold and decisive [official] action”? A peep about Project 2025?

Nah!

NY Times posts one letter critical of their pro-Trump editorial

After noting that the Times editorial board’s “To Serve His Country, President Biden Should Leave the Race” is still on its homepage, you peruse the letters to the editor.    You have to read a few letters that agree with the NY Times position that the Democrats must create a process to make Biden step down before you get to this one, followed by several more agreeing Biden must step down (a sampling the Times no doubt considers a “preponderance of the evidence”).  The NY Times, at its best:

To the Editor:

So let me get this straight. A presidential candidate who is a convicted felon gives a debate performance that is often incoherent, consists primarily of obvious lies, and includes a refusal to unconditionally commit to accepting the results of the presidential election, and your editorial is filled with histrionic calls to remove the other guy who’s run the country ably and ethically for almost four years because he had an off night on the stage?

You really should have consulted with your theater critics, who can school you in the many ways the run of the show ultimately matters more than the blips in previews. Your failure to focus your outrage on Donald Trump’s truly bizarre and bewildering statements in favor of such an overwrought and shortsighted response to Mr. Biden lets the real danger to our democracy off the hook.

Judith Hamera
Pennington, N.J.

Nicely done, Judith.

And this nice, self-evident bit from one of our nation’s greatest winners, a billionaire:

Profile in trembling cowardice

I have many bones to pick with the New York Times.  It is often hard to tell, based on their moral suppleness in presenting propaganda and spin right next to plain, old-fashioned fact, how the Times editorial board differs from that of any Rupert Murdoch rag.   The Times ran dozens of articles, including, and especially, today, about questions over Biden’s age (81) and now, the predictable “we told you so” editorial.  

Here is their latest, about which, in spite of the Grey Lady’s vast influence and my vexation over its complicity in right-wing spin, I am also philosophical. The essential status quo embracing spinelessness of the journal of record just got demonstrated again. Here’s a sample:

As it stands, the president is engaged in a reckless gamble. There are Democratic leaders better equipped to present clear, compelling and energetic alternatives to a second Trump presidency. There is no reason for the party to risk the stability and security of the country by forcing voters to choose between Mr. Trump’s deficiencies and those of Mr. Biden. It’s too big a bet to simply hope Americans will overlook or discount Mr. Biden’s age and infirmity that they see with their own eyes.

Let’s parse a little bit of this bullshit.   

Reckless gamble?  More reckless to leave this helpless, doddering, ancient fossil on the ballot after his bad night in a TV debate format his handlers never should have signed on to (no fact checks, no moderator intervention, one minute to respond to Trump’s many lies) than to create a process to oust your candidate, make a last minute change, admitting your incumbent president/candidate is unqualified for reelection, in spite of his many accomplishments in the face of unified MAGA resistance? 

Democratic leaders better equipped (to acquit themselves better in a 90 minute televised campaign battle called a debate?) — which ones?   Does this ability qualify them to defeat Donald Trump and the reactionary billionaire backed MAGA movement?

No reason for the party to risk not changing their candidate in the weeks before their convention?   Just because there is no process for it and the very few times it was tried, this close to an election, the replacement candidate was trounced, just because it would show hysteria and cowardice, and confirm MAGA propaganda– while also guaranteeing Trump’s election, to do so now?

Another morsel:

Ending his candidacy would be against all of Mr. Biden’s personal and political instincts. He has picked himself up from tragedies and setbacks in the past and clearly believes he can do so again. Supporters of the president are already explaining away Thursday’s debate as one data point compared with three years of accomplishments. But the president’s performance cannot be written off as a bad night or blamed on a supposed cold, because it affirmed concerns that have been mounting for months or even years. Even when Mr. Biden tried to lay out his policy proposals, he stumbled. It cannot be outweighed by other public appearances because he has limited and carefully controlled his public appearances.

The president’s performance cannot be written off as a bad night?

It can’t be outweighed (not by his record, the respect of his fellow democratic leaders worldwide, the many good decisions he continues to make, his bearing on the world stage) by other public appearances because he has limited them in the past?

The Grey Lady finally spoke some plain, indisputable truth, buried toward the very end of a piece urging Democrats to create a process to force their candidate to voluntarily step down:

It is a tragedy that Republicans themselves are not engaged in deeper soul-searching after Thursday’s debate. Mr. Trump’s own performance ought to be regarded as disqualifying. He lied brazenly and repeatedly about his own actions, his record as president and his opponent. He described plans that would harm the American economy, undermine civil liberties and fray America’s relationships with other nations. He refused to promise that he would accept defeat, returning instead to the kind of rhetoric that incited the Jan. 6 attack on Congress.

Followed by:

Democrats who have deferred to Mr. Biden must now find the courage to speak plain truths to the party’s leader. . .The clearest path for Democrats to defeat a candidate defined by his lies is to deal truthfully with the American public: acknowledge that Mr. Biden can’t continue his race, and create a process to select someone more capable to stand in his place to defeat Mr. Trump in November.

The courage to cower, the clearest path, create a process, indeed… so simple when laid out with the authority of the NY Times editorial board. 

Conclusory, opinionated, cowardly, stupid, ill-reasoned, ahistorical, serving not democracy but Trumpism.  Aside from that, and making references to propaganda promoted in its own pages as proof (dozens of articles about Biden’s alleged decrepitude and semi-senility) this shameful editorial is a very fine piece.  Read it for yourself.

Grey Lady Editorial Board

How long before the New York Times is accused of anti-Semitism?

There are anti-Semites, plenty of them, millions of these creatures, everywhere. These hateful fucks have always been around and always will be around. There are also many critics of inhuman policies by the coalition of violent extremists and cynics currently running the Jewish State. Some of these critics are anti-Semites, no doubt. Some of these critics are humanitarians who are not anti-Semites.  Many of these critics are Jews, who, like me, hold our people to the moral standards we are all supposed to live by.

This headline is an uncharacteristically bold statement by the New York Times, we’ll have to keep track of the blowback on this one, eh?  I can hardly wait to see which White Christian nationalist American Nazi is the first to angrily accuse the Grey Lady of vicious anti-Semitism.  Hopefully they won’t give the Nazi salute as they do so, though it would be kind of funny if they did. Hitlerious, actually.