Tuesday, November 15, 2022

That idiot Margaret Sullivan

In "Margaret Sullivan's tawdry and disappointing book (Ava and C.I.)," Ava and C.I. took on the idiot Margaret Sullivan.  She's in my local paper, Sullivan, now talking about "book writing."  Book writing?  Wow.  Do the other residents of Hooterville know Sullivan's on the loose?  "Book writing."

Next up, Jethro's going to try to teach Margaret some book learning.

This is from Ava and C.I.'s piece: 


She and Dan Balz speak.  He's a useless piece of garbage (Hey, Dan!) and we say that as two who've  known him for years.

The problem, Margaret and Dan insist, with journalism today is that Watergate led to 'gotcha coverage' and this bred mistrust in government.

No, shoulder the stupidity, don't wave it around in front of people.


Tricky Dick authorizing illegal spying, compiling an enemies list, ordering the Watergate break-in and much more bred mistrust in government.  These were crimes -- carried out by the government.


Watergate was followed by a brief period of real investigative journalism which quickly stopped -- Katharine Graham, then publisher of THE WASHINGTON POST, gave the notorious speech about how it was time to once again hold journalists in check.  A detail that Sullivan also seems unaware of.

Over and over, in this book by a journalist, the media is the problem.  Never for suppressing the truth, you understand, but for reporting.

The media, Crazy Sullivan insists, cost Hillary the election in 2016.  They shouldn't have been covering the e-mails, she argues.  For the first time, a presidential candidate was the subject of a criminal investigation.  It was news.

Sullivan really doesn't understand what news -- or journalism -- is.

She tells you how the media could have elected Hillary without ever grasping that it is not the media's role to determine elections.  It is the media's role to report on what happens.

She misunderstand her own job.

Which is how we get back to her time at THE NEW YORK TIMES.  Even Margaret Sullivan realizes she was awful there and that she is too close to the staff that she is supposed to be monitoring as the public editor.  So she quits.  It's a shame she ever took the job considering she wasn't up for it.  Reading NEWSROOM CONFIDENTIAL, you have to wonder if she's ever been up to any professional task.

This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot' for Tuesday:

Tuesday, November 15, 2022.  Could the country finally be free of Donald Trump?  We ponder that and other issues. 


Starting with Donald Trump.  The never-ending soap opera was indulged by the GOP.  Feared and indulged.  He was supposed to represent so much to so many.  But, in fact, he couldn't deliver at the mid-terms.  

It's over for him.

He lost in 2020 and he failed to deliver in the mid-terms.  He can bluster and the media can quake -- their usual relationship to one another -- but no one likes a loser and that's what Donald now is.

A loser and a failure.

His bluster argued he was something more than a politician; however, results and actions demonstrate he is something far less and you don't run a loser on your ticket three times.  He was the nominee in 2016 and in 2020.  The Republican Party is stupid enough to run him in 2024?  

You're seeing people turn on him.  



It's natural, he failed to deliver and he exposed himself as powerless -- there's nothing worse for a politician to be than powerless -- it's the political equivalent of a micro-penis.

He could wise up right now and ease into the role of elder statesman of the party who cheers other candidates on and gives a speech at the convention but that's really all he's got now.

He failed to deliver.

And people put a lot of time into him.  He failed to deliver and he took up so much of their time with his never ending soap opera.  Was he persecuted by the media?  Absolutely, they refused to even give him the normal 100 first days of the presidency -- the fluff coverage.  But at a certain point, it becomes:  So what?

Even for his supporters it becomes: So what?

Had he delivered in the mid-terms, things would be different for him.

But he didn't.

And now Republicans are looking at him differently.  With a winner, you'll take a lot.  Look at Aaron Rogers and how the press is no longer being as kind.

When you can't deliver, everyone of your mistakes and faults is magnified and re-examined.


So right now, he's struggling with whether or not he took top secret documents he shouldn't have.  And that just reminds everyone of every other soap opera element when he was president.

And do they, the Republican Party, want a fresh start or do they want a so-so candidate with all that baggage who can't even deliver votes.

Or anything else.

What did Donald deliver that he promised he would?  How did he make the lives of his supporters better?

He fought the entire four years, yes.  Not just with Democrats.  Not just with the media.  He was constantly fighting with his own party.  

And he achieved nothing.

He was supposed to be a maverick, an outsider.  What actions in his four years in office demonstrate that?

None.

Ron DeSantis defeated a Republican in Florida.  It was two Republicans.   Charlie Christ spent most of his life as a Republican.  Could he beat a real Democrat?  Who knows.  But many Republicans are hailing his victory because they're so sick of the past and Ron -- whether he goes on to become the nominee or not -- is a winner and Donald's a loser.

This is not a bad development.

We don't need Donald Trump in another race.  We didn't need him in the race in 2016.  We also don't need Joe Biden -- Joe, who turns 80 in five days.

Jen Psaki has clearly decided that whore and journalist are synonymous.  Joe, she's taken to saying on MSNBC, is the only one who's ever defeated Donald Trump.

First off, that's a lie.  Life has defeated Donald Trump.  Ivana Trump defeated Donald Trump.  Gravity defeated Donald Trump -- look at that face, ew.  The list is endless.

Joe won one race against Donald Trump.  It wasn't that difficult.

At the very start of 2016, we offered "2015: The Year of the Ass" -- a look back at the prior year.  That piece concluded with:


2015 will lead into 2016.  So is it any surprise that, as the year ends, it appears very likely that the two major party candidates who'll be competing next year will be Hillary and Donald Trump?

What else, honestly, what else could The Year of the Ass produce but a match off between each major party's biggest ass?


In 2016, Donald didn't beat one of the party's major politicians.  He beat Hillary Clinton.  Someone who had to cheat to win the nomination.  Had to get the debate questions in an advance.  Someone who was a known loser.  She was supposed to have 2008 all sewn up but she lost those primaries to Barack Obama who infamously said to her face, "You're likable enough."

And to win, Barack had to destroy her.  You cannot have one campaign call the other racist -- and Barack's 2008 campaign called both Hillary and Bill racist -- and then have the person you're calling a racist win eight years later.  They also pushed that she wanted to murder Barack.  Keith Olbermann and Majorie Cohn -- among many others -- took her comments about why she wasn't dropping out of the race to mean that she was (a) hoping someone would murder Barack or (b) asking that someone assassinate Barack.

This garbage came over the airwaves on MSNBC.

She never stood a real chance of winning in 2016.  She had too many negatives.  On top of that, unlike when she was seeking the party's nomination in 2008, she refused to campaign.  Eight years older, she refused to get out and get the vote.  She seemed to think she was entitled to it.  She also seemed to think that she should now run like Barack (celebrities were what she sought out, not voters).  

Hillary was not a great candidate.  She lacked charisma.  The only thing she could sell the people was that she was a workhorse who would get things done.  But you can't refuse to go to Ohio, for example, while you're shaking it onstage with Jennifer Lopez and look like a workhorse who gets things done.

In 2020, any Democrat would have beaten Donald Trump.

Joe is not a savior of the party.  Bernie could have done it, Elizabeth Warren could have done it, Julian Castro could have done it, Cory Booker could have done it, Kirsten Gillibrand could have done it, Amy Klobuchar could have done it, even Mike Bloomberg could have done it.

Joe and Donald both need to step aside.  Let's see if either has the brains to do it.

The country needs leadership, not old men gasping their last breaths as they remain out of touch with the world around them.

Robert Pether doesn't need to be gasping his last breath but, thanks to the failures of the Australian government, he may be.  In the last few months, the UK has freed two of their citizens from Iraq.  Meanwhile Robert Pether rots in an Iraqi jail.  Jessica Bahr (SBS NEWS) reports:


The wife of an Australian man being held in an Iraqi jail has spoken of her fears he won’t survive the ordeal.

Robert Pether has been detained in Iraq since April 2021. He has been locked in a 28-man cell for 19 months.

Mr Pether's wife Desree told SBS News her husband had lost 42 kilograms during his detention.

"To look at him now, it's like he's aged 40 years ... it's just absolutely heartbreaking," she said.

"It's like watching him die slowly and listening to him die slowly and he's not well, he keeps getting sick."


Australians should be toppling their government right now because it refuses to carry out its primary duty: To protect its citizens.






We'll close with BROS.














The following sites updated:




Posted by at