Last week, we saw so many men supporting or 'supporting' women. It touched our little hearts . . . or it would have if we were stupid.
We caught Richard Medhurst monologue-ing on abortion rights. He had to monologue. Oh, he does have guests on his show -- George Galloway, Gonzalo, Pepe Escobar Lira, Konstantin Yaroshenko . . . He's quick to call out women, he's just not quick to bring them on his program. Apparently, Richard suffers from fear of the vagina.
And hes not the only one. Take Little Jackie Hinkle and his program THE DIVE. Little Hinkle last brought on a woman when he hoped the woman was as drunk as he was and that he could get her into bed. Since we've noted that program, we've been assured that the women turned him down and found his taking her back to his place to toss her on YOUTUBE as desperate and pathetic a pick up attempt as we did. Poor Little Jackie Hinkle, thinking he could use his platform as a pick up line.
THE CONVO COUCH loves to call out women as well . . . and like Little Hinkle, it doesn't enjoy bringing them on air. They can bring on Jeremy Kuzmarov. Meanwhile, whatever his other problems, at least Jimmy Dore could bring on a woman last week (Hermela Aregawi).
Whatever his other problems? Are we being too hard on the little boys and Fiorella again?
Or maybe the rest of you -- especially those who have e-mailed to tell us how right we were to call them out and how you would never, ever have Scott Ritter on your program -- are being especially cowardly.
The programs mentioned above brought convicted sex offender Scott Ritter on to their programs last month Three times arrested for pedophilia, convicted and sent to prison for it,
October 27, 2011, the following was noted:
AP notes
that Scott Ritter received his prison sentence yesterday. Yes, we
noted it in the snapshot but we have to note it repeatedly because so
few will bother to report on the pedophile. Scott Ritter was a Bushy
who turned on his master and began barking and snarling. He really
didn't have a great deal to offer to the Iraq War despite having been a
weapons inspector in the 90s. He published several books, most
unreadable. He ranted and raved when given time and came off unhinged.
When news first broke of a bust for attempting to have a sexual
encounter with an underage female, Pig Ritter refused to answer
questions about it on air (on CNN). Ritter was quickly kicked to the
curb because pedophiles generally are. But instead of addressing that
reality, Amy Goodman and a host of others insisted repeatedly that he
was the victim. They put out Pig Ritter's spin that he was being
punished for seaking out. That arrest, it would turn out, was his
second for that crime. A detail that would get left out.
And
while they were all so happy to have Scott Ritter on their programs as a
guest, they weren't willing to inform their audiences of his 2009
arrest for the same crime, his trial or his sentencing yesterday. Their
sudden reticence was surprising considering how they loved to have him
as their guest -- Amy Goodman, Rachel Maddow (on Air America Radio),
Laura Flanders, Scott Horton, etc. Seymour Hersh went around the
country with him on a tour and to show support as if to say 'Scott
Ritter didn't try to sexually exploit me so he's innocent.' But, of
course, Pig Ritter was accused and convicted of targeting young girls,
not elderly men.
At his 2011 trial, the Pennsylvania's Sexual Offenders Assessment Board's Paula Brust testified that Ritter was "at risk to offend again" and stated, ''He is not able to manage his offending in the community, despite sex offender treatment."
Despite that, Jimmy and CONVO COUCH and Richard Medhurst and Little Jackie Hinkle and many others felt the need to bring him on in April.
"Ava, C.I., you're missing the point! They brought him on to address the issue of pedophiles"
Save that crap for someone else. As we've noted, they brought him on their show, they called him an expert and Jimmy Dore even praised Ritter's poorly written books, but they never told their viewers that Scott Ritter was arrested three times for pedophilia, that he was sent to prison for it (in 2011) and that he was a registered sex offender.
That they didn't think was important? Oh, they knew it was important and that's why they didn't share it. The only thing more repulsive than the hosts were their pathetic viewers leaving comments like "I always agree with Scott Ritter!" Really? Even when he's trying to get a young girl to meet him for sex, even when he's exposing himself online? Who the hell are you? The pathetic Mrs. Scott Ritter?
It's bad enough that the hosts did that but they did it in April.
Why April?
Well when you don't interact with women, maybe you don't grasp that April, each year, is Sexual Assault Awareness Month.
They used that month -- Little Jackie, Fiorella, Craig Pasta, Richard Medhurst, Jimmy Dore and others -- to promote a registered sex offender. That's how they 'celebrated.'
It was outrageous and no one believes that care about women's rights or women's right to privacy after that.
They're speaking out for abortion now? Probably afraid they're going to knock some women up and get stuck with child support -- Fiorella and her phantom penis make her go along for the ride.
It's disgusting.
And we're going to return to another point about these shows and disgusting: They're racist in that they only book themselves. If you just talk to the people in your neighborhood and it's predominately White, well maybe you don't leave your neighborhood for some other reason.
But when you're hosting a program on YOUTUBE and bringing on guests and you don't bring on African-Americans, you're making choices and your choices are racist and someone needs to confront you on that.
We made this point before. We offered examples of guests that they should be bringing on including Glen Ford and Margaret Kimberley of BLACK AGENDA REPORT. We saw one host -- and only one host -- demonstrate the ability of self-reflection and bring Margaret on as a guest (Glen Ford passed away shortly after we posted our piece).
What audience do these supposedly left programs think they're building when they bring on a convicted sex offender? Do they really think any sane woman's going to say, "I am so thrilled Jimmy Dore brought on a pedophile!!! I can't wait to see what his political positions are!!!"
And grasp the message that they really sent: We are more comfortable inviting a White, registered sex offender onto our program than a Black woman or man."
That's what their actions say.
They can have a hissy fit at us -- and they have -- all the want. But we're merely noting how they've chosen to run their programs. And, yes, it is racist.
They need to take a look at themselves, a serious look.
We're not saying that Jimmy, Craig, Fiorella or Jimmy hate or dislike African-Americans, we're stating that their practice of booking guests and who they see as potential guests is racist.
So maybe REVOLUTIONARY BLACKOUT can stop shouting them out?
And maybe BLACK AGENDA REPORT should stop promoting Richard Medhurst?
We don't think it would be a discussion that lasted more than a minute if Glen Ford were still around. Glen would say, "I'm told there's a problem with representation on your program. I've worked hard to build a platform for Black voices so if we're going to do a regular feature at BLACK AGENDA REPORT with you, I need to see improvement on the guests you book and if we don't see that improvement, we're dropping you because I didn't work myself sick to promote racism."
See these same hosts that won't book Black voices are happy to use Black outlets for promotion.
And when, for example, REVOLUTIONARY BLACKOUT promotes Jimmy Dore, he gets a pass, he gets to seem cool. And he's not, not if he's refusing to book African-American guests.
Grasp that they will book -- and did -- a White convicted sex offender on their program before they will bring Margaret or Ajamu Baraka or any other authentic voice. Grasp that.
In the end, what this is really about is the truth.
And they're not being truthful. If they really felt Scott Ritter belonged on their program, they would have had no problem telling their audiences that Ritter was a convicted sex offender. The fact that they won't do that goes to the reality that no sane audience is going to accept you glorifying a sex offender.
It's dishonest. Dishonest in the same way, that Jimmy rages at TYT for being.
Mike chose Jimmy as Idiot of the Week and Mike's right. This doesn't go away. You can't wish it away, you can't make it disappear. You can own your actions and apologize for them but that takes stronger character than most people have. What Jimmy and the others did was dishonest. They've got an audience that's watching to see what happens next. This is how you lose the trust of your audience. And certain of the hosts can be made at us all they want, it's called accountability and this is about standards.
You either have standards or you don't. If you do, you probably rolled your eyes Friday when SHOWTIME debuted SHERYL. SHOWTIMES promoted the 'documentary' with absurd claims such as, "A documentary portrait of the singular storyteller who's lived it all and seen it all but never told it all -- until now. " She hasn't lived it all and, in that special, she didn't tell it all.
That special was embarrassing. Sheryl has been overly praised for her modest talents which include the ability to rip off Rickie Lee Jones -- an actual artist.
Sheryl is a joke and will always be one. We defended her in 2003, when she was being attacked for her tiny symbolism moves opposing the Iraq War. She was a coward but we were more bothered by the relationship she was in.
So let's jump into that.
Lance Armstrong. A disgraced sports star. We don't care. We never cheered him on. We never liked him.
So imagine how surprised we were, watching SHERYL, to feel sorry for him.
That's because Sheryl's an attention whore who will do anything for an extended minute of fame.
She and the producers play a song over a photo of him which calls him a liar by how they use it. They're the liars for pretending that this track from 1993 is about Lance -- whom she hadn't even met.
Sheryl then sobs about being betrayed and boo-hoo how the first year she thought they'd get married.
Sheryl's never married a man and she's never going to. That's reality.
Here's some more reality. Sheryl posed and preened pretending to be against the Iraq War. Remember that? Who was Lance Armstrong's best friend when Sheryl was involved with Lance?
Bully Boy Bush.
Sheryl's a fake ass liar.
After she broke up with Lance, she started gal-palling around with Larry David's ex Laurie, a woman who was (worst reading) a fake on climate change or (best reading) a hypocrite.
As they palled around and preened for the climate and especially the cameras, they made a lot of comments about Dick Cheney. He was Vice President at the time, so you can understand that until you grasp that Bully Boy Bush headed that administration and, even after she ended it with Lance, Sheryl still wouldn't call out Bully Boy Bush. In fact, she praised him in October of 2017. Fake ass.
Her career's been over for some time. Her 2013 album only sold 65,000 copies, her 2017 album only sold 20,000 copies and her 2019 album only sold 49,000 copies. And her 2021 live album? Didn't even make it into the BILLBOARD TOP 200 best selling albums for one week. It never made it onto the chart. In other words, they have to present -- have to -- her appearing early in the day at a rock festival in 2018 as the highlight of her career today.
The whole thing was as fake and as unneeded as Christine Pelosi last week. News of Samuel Alito's draft opinion for the Court that would overturn ROE V WADE has Christine surfacing to blame others. We guess it is too much to expect her to bite the hand that feeds her. After all, we're talking about a 55-year-old woman who never held a job her mommy didn't get her. Christine and Nancy have both mistaken matriarchy for feminism.
Nancy Pelosi, echoing Hillary Clinton in the '00s, has edged away from support for reproductive freedom and privacy rights for some time. Her 2017 public statements about how the party might be emphasizing abortion too much ("it shouldn't be a litmus test") was not the first time she'd expressed that sentiment and she is currently backing an anti-abortion candidate named Henry Cuellar.
Smart people would be holding the Democratic Party accountable. We're not surrounded by smart people. NOW issued a ridiculous statement which included:
The Supreme Court’s decision will
jeopardize women’s lives—particularly the lives of young, Black,
Latinas, Indigenous, and economically insecure women who are most at
risk. Now, it’s up to us to vote for women’s lives.
We must get the Women’s Health Protection
Act, which establishes a federal statutory right to access to abortion
care, passed in Congress, and that means electing a Manchin-proof
majority in the Senate and keeping control of the House. What’s more,
we must break turnout predictions in the fall elections and flip control
of state legislatures that are held by narrow margins.
We know that there’s a feminist majority
of voters who can change the course of history in the next election.
This is our mission. This is our time. We need your collective voice
and collective power so that we can defend Roe. We will not fail.
How pathetic.. The Democratic Party needs pressure right now. Instead, NOW is insisting that we vote Democrat regardless. We can't imagine Betty Friedan being this pathetic. NOW could be calling for people to take to the streets, to donate for services to cover women's travel to other states for abortions should the Court strike down Roe, etc. Instead, all NOW can envision is churning out the vote for the Democratic Party -- it's time to take away their exempt status. They are not independent, they are an arm of the Democratic Party. Contrast NOW's nonsense with what Anne Rumberger offers in her column at JACOBIN.
We are in this position precisely because we have failed to make demands on Democrats.
Jeffrey St. Clair points out at COUNTERPUNCH:
+ Of course, Biden got there before Alito did, voting in 1981
to support a constitutional amendment that would allow states to
overturn Roe v. Wade. Soon after the Roe ruling, Biden announced his
opinion that the court had “gone too far” and that women shouldn’t have
the “sole right to say what should happen to her body.”
+ The right to an abortion wasn’t “granted” by the Supreme Court, it
was won through decades of organizing. Similarly, it wasn’t taken away
by a “court” but by a decades long counter-revolution, often violent,
cruel and vicious, that included clinic bombings, the assassinations of
abortion providers, the harassment of women seeking abortions. The
liberals never really fought back, even as over the past 20 years,
clinics have steadily disappeared across the South and rural Midwest,
leaving some states with only one or two clinics, meaning for all
practical purposes only wealthy women had a “right” to an abortion,
which is not a right at all.
+ Abortion as a constitutional right for all ended in 1976 with the
passage of the Hyde Amendment banning federal funding of abortions–a
measure supported by many Democrats, including Biden. It meant only
three years after Roe, instead of being a right, abortion had already
become a mere privilege of those who could afford one. The erosion has
been steady ever since. Now the price of abortions will be even higher
and for many will include a plane ticket to the 15 states where
abortions will remain legal until a national ban is passed, which is now
likely than ever. After which, women will have to fly to places where
abortion was once banned, like Ireland and Mexico, to legally get one…
+ The US already has the highest maternal mortality rate
in the industrial world. Black women are especially vulnerable. Their
risk of dying as a result of childbirth is three times higher than the
already deplorable average in the US. This decision will drive that
shameful statistic even higher…
+ There were 861 pregnancy-related deaths in the US in 2020, roughly
24 per 100,000 births. According to a statistical analysis in the Financial Times,
in the past six years, there’s been an average of 4 abortion-related
deaths, for a rate of 0.41 per 100,000 legal abortions. Abortion is
roughly 60 times safer than pregnancy and birth.
+ Kathleen Belew: “One historian of abortion argues that abortion
stays at pretty much the same rate per capita over time whether it’s
legal or banned. What changes when you make it illegal is how many
people die from it.”
+ But listen to what the second-ranking Democrat in the House, James Clyburn, had to say to the San Antonio Report,
in defense of his support for the fanatically anti-abortion Rep. Henry
Cuellar: “Does this issue carry more weight than voting [rights]? I
don’t think so. I think restoring the Voting Rights Act is a much
weightier issue than this.”
+ This moment has been coming for decades. For much of that time, the
Dems have held complete control of Congress. At any time, they could
have codified Roe. But they didn’t want to in large measure because the
threat of Roe being overturned was a huge fundraising machine for them
and one of the few reasons to vote for otherwise awful candidates. Now
the inevitable has happened and the last rationale for supporting this
pathetic bunch of neoliberal losers has vanished and with it a hard-won
constitutional right that they used as a political gimmick. Shame on
them.
+ After the Democrats lose the Senate and the House in the fall and
Biden gets flattened by a ticket of Ron DeSantis and Marjorie Taylor
Greene in 2024, the Republicans will pass a national ban on abortion,
even if they have to jettison the filibuster to get it through the
Senate. It’s called playing for keeps.
+ No one Nancy Pelosi knows is poor enough to ever suffer because of
this ruling and she knows her party will be able to raise tens of
millions because of it, even though they’ll never do anything to
overturn it…
A privacy law should have been passed by the US Congress long ago. If Democrats are now prepared to do so now, when they control both houses of Congress and the White House, when will they be? It's time for that party to put up or shut up. And it's time for larger issues about precedent to be addressed repeatedly by the press so that all of We The People can grasp what's at stake. Kathy Spillar (MS. MAGAZINE) notes, "In 1992, when the Supreme Court reaffirmed Roe in Casey, it said it could not 'overrule [precedent] under fire.' Overturning Roe now
would, whatever the Court intends or says, be perceived as rewarding
anti-abortion extremists' violent acts and would undermine the rule of
law. In Casey, the Court refused to overrule a landmark
precedent under threat of violence. It should not do so now, a
generation later, when even more anti-abortion violence has become an
undeniable part of our nation’s history."
This is about abortion. This is about privacy. This is about truth.
