Weinstein's defense against rape charges is that it was consensual sex. Bloomberg's defense of the nondisclosure agreements related to his serial workplace misogyny ("Jokes I told") is that the gagging of women was also consensual. These gals, Bloomberg insinuated, loved every minute of his smothering legalities. So no, he will never release them from their lingering pleasurable bondage.
It remains to be seen whether the thousands of ads playing every single minute all around Bloombergville USA will offset his dismal debate performance. He seemed hell-bent not so much on winning the nomination and the presidency, but on winning the Oscar for his wizened, whining live-action portrayal of Mr. Burns.
"Portrayal" is kind of a stretch, because the godzillionaire former mayor became stone cold dead on his feet once Elizabeth Warren got through with him.
Just the clip of him rolling his eyes in bored disdain as she destroyed him should be enough to ruin his candidacy. Then again, there are those nonstop ubiquitous ads costing him an estimated $3000 a minute just in local TV markets alone, the hundreds of millions of dollars of his personal fortune being spent on bribing politicians and super-delegates and cable TV executives and journalists and paying off the country's entire stable of consultants, pollsters, PR flacks and caterers. At the rate that his vast fortune is consuming all the "talent," the least he can do is endow a graduate program in Electoral Chicanery at Harvard to keep churning out the elite entrepreneurs of the future.
Elizabeth Warren did Bernie Sanders a huge favor by going after Bloomberg, while only making soft murmuring complaints when the NBC moderators baited her with the Bernie Bro trope. As for Bernie himself, red-baited from both the right and the center, his theory that a couple of his online supporters might even be linked to "Russian interference" made me roll my own eyes in dismay. But I suppose we should be grateful that at long last, Sanders did not once preface an answer with "So-and-so is a good friend of mine."
Since his good friend Joe Biden is already a political corpse, nobody even bothered to call out his breathtaking hypocrisy when he scolded Bloomberg over his racist Stop and Frisk crusade. Biden's authorship of the racist Crime Bill set the stage long ago for Bloomberg's own ethnic cleansing ("gentrification") campaign. As recently as Obama's second term, the former vice president was leading the charge for more cops on the street and more high tech military hardware of the type used against the citizens of Ferguson, MO when they became upset over the police killing of Michael Brown. The fact that immigration activists loudly disrupted his closing argument was barely even mentioned in mainstream media debate narratives this morning.
Given that billionaire Tom Steyer was missing from the stage, centrists Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar got more generous time to snipe at one another while urging everybody else to stop fighting so as to beat Donald Trump and magically "bring the country together." What do you call it when two annoying, cloying centrists cancel each other out - besides its being a very refreshing sight to behold?
I've gone from dismay to delight that Bloomberg successfully bribed his way on to the debate stage. People finally got a look at him without the protective gauze of his glitzy TV commercials. They're also getting a much-needed true picture of the hordes of liberal politicians who have fallen all over themselves to endorse him in exchange for his "philanthropy." He has shown once and for all that not only can he not beat Trump, he is simply a more urbane, nasal,annoying - and dangerous - version of Trump. He is Trump without the stand-up comedy talent.
If Bloomberg is anointed the nominee in the second ballot of a contested convention - or worse, if he is simply the stalking horse for a third Hillary Clinton run - it will spell the final and long-overdue demise of the Democratic Party and perhaps even usher in the long-overdue street actions and revolts and strikes that this country so sorely needs. It would likely be the smallest turnout in modern electoral history.
Even if Bernie Sanders does win the presidency, moreover, the corporate Democrats will have no other choice but to show whose side they are really on as they thwart his every reasonable executive action.
Thanks to Michael Bloomberg, reality in all its ugliness is finally getting a fair shake and a fair hearing. The rotten center cannot hold.
20 comments:
Last night was such fun!!!! The only thing more enjoyable would have been to see Amy smack smug, smarmy Pete upside the head.
I still think Good Cop Bernie needs a Bad Cop exactly like Elizabeth Warren to be his running mate. Last night she proved she's got the right stuff. I'm glad to see Whiny Warren is gone and only hope that means her Clinton advisors have jumped ship onto the Bloomberg Bankwagon.
I've read that Sanders' team has explored a dual role of VP/Treasury Secretary and found that would be legal. Sounds good to me.
Whenever there is someone such as a politician (or "titan of industry", "social entrepreneur", "thought leader", etc.) giving a speech (or debate performance) that I'd rather not watch (but feel obligated to, in order to be aware in greater depth of how their reactionary policies might impact), I find it helpful to pretend I'm watching a combined live-action + animation film (a la Roger Rabbit), and imagine that the "toon" character is performing NSFW acts on the speaker's orifices! The only problem is that once imagined, those acts are impossible to "unsee"!
Andy nails it!
https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/bloomberg-to-spend-ten-billion-dollars-to-buy-entirely-different-personality
What a beautiful day!
I'm so happy to read Karen's post and the comments. Instead of commenting myself, I think I'll just go back and read the post, comments and link all over again.
Not to contradict myself about not commenting, but if Bernie and Warren do join forces, their combined delegates might well exceed the magic number to take it all on the first ballot.
Yet another example of how nominal democracy is being manipulated:
"Revealed: quarter of all tweets about climate crisis produced by bots.
Draft of Brown study says findings suggest ‘substantial impact of mechanized bots in amplifying denialist messages’."
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/feb/21/climate-tweets-twitter-bots-analysis
Bernie has said his VP will be a younger woman. I thought he had also said she would be a woman of color, but I can't find a link. Warren isn't much younger, and she has really pissed off much of Bernie's base.
This was an entertaining read (regarding the last debate): https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/the-one-with-mike-bloomberg?fbclid=IwAR1_VCSnNYRE6zIJ69ljSuHP7Ho0Pl_QagEulCwclo08LAgJlL4kgSlvN88
Russiagate is not over. The top story in today's digital NYT is about Putin having, with the usual digital chicanery, helped Bernie get more delegates. The report goes on to say Bernie made a big show of blasting Putin for interfering in our storied democracy. Putin's electoral interference is pretty close to an act of war, right?
But I also find Bernie's reaction unsettling. Lord knows, Bernie needs all the help he can get as he struggles on the DNC's uneven playing field. Yet he rejects a well-intentioned helping hand from 'over there'? C'mon.
He did something similar with Zephyr Teachout, remember? He apologized for her and rejected her help after she began boosting him with her winning eloquence. How do you explain Bernie's disloyalty to friends and unfailing loyalty to his enemies?
There's a pattern here: Bernie keeps making the wrong moves. Bernie protests too much. Bernie does not want to win. Yet he's winning, thanks to Putin.
Putin, trying this time around to be more even-handed with his deciding influence (remember 2016?), has been supporting no only Trump but also Bernie and even Bloomberg (another important revelation in today's Times).
Trying to do the right thing in 2020, Putin doesn't realize that by helping Bernie he is interfering with Bernie's repeat attempt to secure unity for the Democratic Party by sheepdogging the adoring lefties. I expect Vlad will throw his hands up and turn away in disgust.
@Elizabeth
Thanks for the link. That was funny! I actually don't trust Elizabeth Warren, but desperate times require desperate measures.
I prefer Tulsi Gabbard as a running mate/VP. She'd play Bad Cop nicely to Bernie's Good Cop. Unlike Warren and even Bernie, Tulsi has proven she has guts:
"You, the queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, and personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party for so long, have finally come out from behind the curtain".
Tulsi's the Queen of Flamethrowers!
She gave it to Kamela Harris too. Just imagine how she could coolly disembowel Bloomberg and Buttigieg if she could buy a rule change from the DNC and get back on the debate stage.
Too bad Bernie is so soft on Democratic Party corruption. Imagine how the establishment and media would go ballistic if he chose Tulsi with her flamethrower to address the rot and corruption that they'd promise to clean up. Unlike Trump, the public would know it was genuine and trust their word.
If Bernie doesn't start taking on the corruption of the DNC now, then even if he wins (a toss-up of the weighted coin), the DNC/Dems will suffocate and kill the revolution while it's still in the cradle. They're already trying to abort it and will probably succeed with their Putin Poison Pill cooked up by the usual anonymous IC 'officials' and sold to the corporate media. Ingredients unknown but TOXIC.
Warren might just be correct, if not offensive, when she says Bernie is a yeller and not a doer. While he's certainly the right messenger to promote the political revolution and get it over the finish line (unless he's cheated), someone else would be better to get the job done. Like a woman. Not named Hillary. And not any of her proteges.
Tulsi for VP!
Here's a couple of handy links to keep track of the delegate count state by state and nationally.
The second link, Ballotpedia, in addition to keeping the delegate count by candidate, is a nerdy civics encyclopedia. So far as I can tell, it is an objective source of information, not an advocacy group or a front for any special interest.
Did I mention that at the end of this primary season (6 June 2020) Bernie will need 1991 delegates in his pocket to win the nomination on the first ballot?
https://results.decisiondeskhq.com
https://ballotpedia.org/Democratic_delegate_rules,_2020
Annie, are you serious? Your flamer Tulsi Gabbard just replied "present" when she was called to vote on President Trump's impeachment.
I love Tulsi Gabbard. She did exactly the right thing, voting, “Present” on the Congressional floor in the impeachment hearings. She knew Trump would be acquitted by the Republican majority Senate and his popularity would rise significantly, making him harder to beat in the next election. It has.
I keep thinking of all the money wasted on that fiasco, that could have gone to housing the homeless or feeding starving children in war-torn countries.
Also, Tulsi re-introduced legislation she had already written, to require backup paper ballots for the 14 states not having them (to allay the fear of Russia interfering).
Also, Bernie, my hero, appears to be doing all of the right things and his popularity has soared. He won Nevada with an overwhelming lead.
Of course I would love it if Bernie were elected and he chose Tulsi as his Vice President. But I think she would jeopardize his chances of winning. Nina Turner is wonderful and if she hired a stylist to give her a new wardrobe and hairstyle, might be just the thing for a win. She is certainly brilliant and appears to have Bernie’s talent for not making mistakes when she talks publicly.
Jay, I can’t figure you out. You were so correct when you said years ago, in a much cleverer way than me, that Bernie Sanders had to be tactful and couldn’t say the things that you and I can say because he’s running for office.
I hope the Russiagate business and fear of Socialism don’t ruin Bernie’s chances in the election.
Where is the proof of Russian interference in our elections? There is no proof.
I'm with Annie and "Anonymous." Thank you both - and you, too, Jay - not to mention, Karen!
@Erik Roth
Absolutely I'm serious, and I agree with her decision to vote present. She doesn't need a flame to throw heat. Here's an Op-Ed from Tulsi 2 days ago explaining it as just common sense.
'Tulsi Gabbard: How Democrats’ Impeachment Campaign Helped Trump'
https://fortune.com/2020/02/21/tulsi-gabbard-democrats-trump-impeachment/
So how would WE react if/when the Republicans were to announce, before he's even inaugurated, that they'll impeach and remove President-elect Bernie Sanders? Yup. It should have been obvious how it would backfire on the Dems but hatred overruled logic and they played the impeachment game anyway.
Dem leadership definitely scored an 'Own Goal'. It's going to be harder for any Dem to defeat Trump as a result, but the Dem leaders won't own that failure any more than Hillary owned her Pied Piper strategy to elevate Trump which backfired spectacularly. Same poor judgment. Hmmm, could the same Mastermind be behind both? After all, ignoring bread and butter issues in favor of an endless Fight Trump strategy has been the Dem theme ever since The Night Hillary Lost.
Yes, Tulsi as VP would be like waving a red flag in front of a bull, but who really cares about protecting Hillbully after she publicly humiliated Bernie with taunts of "Nobody likes Bernie. Nobody wants to work with Bernie. Bernie gets nothing done... Bernie is divisive", etc. like some junior high twit. What kind of person would fail to realize that it would hurt her more than him? The same type who pushes for impeachment for revenge. The same type who cackled shamelessly over the sodomized death of Libya's President. She's starting to make Trump seem mature.
Anyway, Tulsi is correct and has good old common sense. Impeachment was selfish and short-sighted.
Report to duty VP/Major Gabbard. Ready. Aim. FLAME!
"HELLO SOMEBODY!" I too love Nina Turner! She's our "wishbone, our jawbone, and our backbone". I'm a YUGE fan.
Hey Pete Buttigieg "What is it about Bernie that draws such people?"
"Jay, I can’t figure you out."
Moi? I assume Anonymous was Annie responding to Erik and then to me.
Peace, Annie. My comment of 22/02/2020 11:00 was a failed attempt at mocking the Russiagate line and the just-out intelligence report alerting Bernie he was receiving support from Putin & Co.
If you go over to MoA of last week, you can see how "b" does irony better as it applied to the MSM revelation that Bloomberg was another Russian asset. Seems like both his grandfathers were Russian; if only border agents back then had been more vigilant.
Amateurs, I know, should not attempt irony; but I love the genre. Let it therefore be made clear to all here assembled that half of my comments are supposed to be, well, sardonic. I am unsure which half.
I do have an honest-to-goodness problem, though, with Bernie endlessly pushing the Russiagate line as true. Some revolutionary! He can't even buck a cheap DNC myth.
On the one hand, for reasons I need not enumerate now, I trust Bernie about as far as I can throw the Green Mountains. On the other hand, I find the pearl clutching by the Times and many MSM outlets over Bernie's weak-tea socialism and radicalism ridiculous. Half the country is poor or on the verge of being poor. Eleven million kids are "food insecure." Bernie's domestic program is at best a pale New Deal. (As for his foreign policy, I try not to think about that.)
In so far as all this relates the coming campaign between Trump and (hopefully) Bernie, I'm all in for Bernie, even with my profound misgivings. Bernie's all we've got to get rid of Trump, who, the more I witness his piggish and clumsy behaviour, the more I suspect Clinton would have been the lesser of the two great evils in 2016. If Biden, or Warren, or Bloomberg, or etc., etc. prevail this time around, I'll vote Green again.
I, too, am sympathetic to Gabbard. I've sent money to her campaign, but I don't wear rose-colored glasses viewing her biography and slim record in the House. I would like to see how she performs in a big job of Bernie's administration, maybe as Secretary of State, the same plum Obama gave to Clinton. Let her prove herself as both tough and wise over time before we give her the keys to One Observatory Circle.
As you have already said, she would be a great debater in the campaign, but as Bernie's VP nominee she would frighten off half the disgusted Republicans who might consider crossing over to vote for Bernie, and about the same number of "moderate" Democrats who would rather turn to Trump to lead them back to Schlesinger's vital center.
Back to Bernie and what he can and can't say on the campaign trail to a dumbed down electorate. Who knows when he's merely fooling the deep state by pretending to parrot their line or when he really, really means it? Just as he cannot be too frank with the public, he cannot be too contrarian towards the deep state. And he'll have to continue in the same manner AFTER he lands in the Oval Office. So much for the most powerful job in the world. Otherwise, the powers that be in finance and the bureaucracy will see that he accomplishes nothing, not even the basic domestic reforms about which he may be serious.
Bottom line: I won't hold my nose when I vote for Bernie in November. But I'll cross my fingers and hope both he and we survive the ensuing four years.
Annie, thanks for your further reasoning, which I can now see as intriguing, if not right out compelling. Certainly critical, should Bernie prevail over the despicable Democratic Party bosses and actually succeed to be the nominee, will be his choice for Vice President. McGovern was demolished by the vicious media take down of Eagleton. Bernie's running mate could well make the difference, and I do think a woman will serve him, and all of us well.
The question is: who? And with Gabbard you just may well be right, again. So how can this message, in all its crucial aspects, get through to the Sanders campaign?
Not incidentally, as far as the impeachment farce imposed by Nancy Pelosi went, I believe that John Nichols and Ralph Nader had it right, but of course that's all sloshed over the dam now. The oligarchs playing the tune to which Pelosi, Perez, Schumer, et al., dance would rather have Trump, or Bloomberg, than Sanders. Note that Clint Eastwood says that "electing Bloomberg would make my day."
@Anonymous - It would help if you'd make up an identity and click on Name/URL option below and enter it, otherwise it gets confusing.
@Jay-Ottawa - Yes, I have used other names in the past just for fun, but I'm Annie now all the time. That wasn't my comment. But thanks for your comment.
Agree about being wary of all politicians. No matter how principled they start out being, they are, after all, engaged in a dirty, complex business.
We should always be wary of politicians.
Just look at the cash cow that the half-assed, prolonged impeachment movement turned into, and look at who's been milking it. Not Tulsi. She kept her wits about her and didn't succumb to the temptation to cash in, nor did she spread the contagion of hate and fear that it's based on - the feed for the cash cow. I salute her for that.
Tom Steyer was first. He launched Need to Impeach, ostensibly to impeach Trump but conveniently generating a massive database for his future primary campaign. Who didn't see that coming? He's a billionaire and knows a business opportunity when he sees one.
Elizabeth Warren was the first primary candidate to call loudly for impeachment. That was her primary policy, at least initially, and she milked it for support and donations. That was before she played the Female Bernie and adopted all his policies. Before she morphed into Bernie-But-Better. Before she became a whiny, old-school feminist sounding a lot like Hillary. Then she morphed into Feisty Flamethrower. I'm just surprised she hasn't changed her hairstyle and clothing with each iteration like Hillary did. By the way, what's her latest campaign slogan? Capitalist To My Bones?
The corporate media certainly cashed in, just as they did when Hillary asked them to carry out her Pied Piper strategy. They know a business opportunity when they see one. "It might not be good for the country, but it's great for our network!" said the former CBS head, Les Moonves. Ka-Ching!
Then there are the rest of the politicians and pundits. Even Bernie has to remind us at every opportunity that Donald Trump is the most dangerous President EVAH, like that's news?
Stoking the negative emotions of fear and hatred is repugnant. It doesn't just selfishly generate capital, it also harmfully supports psy-ops such as CoupGate. It's nice to know that at least one politician actually RESISTED - Tulsi.
Tulsi's not perfect, but she's one of the rare public figures who's grounded in basic principles of decency, fairness, and honesty. She also has (uncommon) common sense.
I, Carol, am the anonymous commenter, above, although I certainly used the choice inadvertently and merely from confusion and computer ignorance. I entered my comments two or three times, believing my first entry didn’t go through.
Jay, I confess to being gullible a lot, though I love your humor. I still think Bernie Sanders says all the right things.
I don’t comment here often, probably out of fear because you all seem so brilliant and I usually agree with you and Karen, so you don’t get my back up.
Annie, I take Jay’s mistaking me for you as a compliment.
Beg pardon to both of you, Carole and Annie. I simply assumed the "Anonymous" was an innocent filing error by a regular that sometimes happens to all of us working with these damned machines.
Comes da revolution, the programmers of such clumsy apps will be the first marched off to hard time at Guantanamo. Soon to follow will be those who assume too much. As they drag me away, I will not be able to shout like Dreyfus, "I am innocent!, I am innocent!"
Post a Comment