“How much more money do any one of you actually really need? Why would you ever consider taking something away from people that means so much to them? This isn’t a game. Football isn’t just a game. It’s one of those amazing things in life that can make you feel shit one moment and then like it’s Christmas morning the next. It has the ability to make heroes and villains out of ordinary men. People love this game. My father used to love this game. You all used to love this game, I’m sure of it…Just because we own these teams doesn’t mean they belong to us. And I don’t want to be part of something that could possibly destroy this beautiful game. Because I would hate for all those little kids and grown-ups out there to ever lose access to that beautiful passionate part of themselves.”
Rebecca Welton [played by Hannah Waddingham] from S3 E10 of Ted Lasso
She may be talking to the owners of the richest football clubs about the formation of a “Super League” but in reality this speech would be suitable for just about any board of any corporation that produces any product needed or enjoyed by the masses.
The “one media story” is all about the GOP and what they’ve done since they’ve taken over the House of Representatives (albeit barely).
We all knew that serving the American people was furthest from their minds, and in a way it’s to their credit that they didn’t even bother hiding the fact that a major priority of theirs was to use the subpoena power of committees to find, or at least create, enough dirt on Joe Biden & his family to trash his name as much as possible in the build up to the 2024 election.
Now to the “three media clips” in question. One is from MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” program, the second one is from “The Young Turks” and the reason you don’t see a third in this post is because it is the clip the other two are talking about, namely one from Fox News as Maria Baritiromo interviewing James Comer who is the GOP Chairman of the House Oversight Committee that is one of many gunning for the Bidens.
Most of the time it would be counter-productive to share rhetoric from people like Comer, not just because it’s designed to smear, but also because it is so boringly predictable. Naturally we know it boils down to “Biden=bad” which is the red meat Fox viewers want to hear and at this stage they don’t even need to have found actual evidence to do an interview like this, all they need is for Comer to say something like “We are hearing reports that….” and their work is done.
For these clips, the story is about a “whistleblower” that they claim has information about Biden supposedly working for the Chinese government. They announced this a week or two ago, but now it seems the whistleblower has “gone missing”???
Which brings us to the other two clips. First, here’s Morning Joe, hosted by former Republican congressman Joe Scarborough. He now hosts the morning show on MSNBC which would make you think he’s a Democrat now, but I reckon he’s the guy on which Aaron Sorkin’s character Will McAvoy in The Newsroom was based. But that’s a debate for another day, for this clip Scarborough plays the exchange between Bartiromo & Comer before having a long laugh about how the GOP “lost” a whistleblower, like that’s the biggest takeaway from the Fox clip.
So I watched this on Monday, and I couldn’t believe that even though Joe goes from his monologue to talk to about eight different “co-hosts” about the clip, none of them appears to notice the obvious. They make it out that “even Maria is disgusted” by the disappearance of the whistleblower, when IMO it doesn’t take a whole lot of grey matter to see that what Maria is doing is trying to make it look to the viewers that Biden, who they’re trying to maintain is some kind of Don Corleone figure, somehow had the informant “whacked”.
Thankfully by Wednesday we had this coverage by The Young Turks where they see it for what it is. Now THIS is proper analysis.
The girl on the left, Emma Vigeland, usually isn’t on TYT anymore this was a guest appearance – she was a host up to a few years ago but now she works with Sam Seder at The Majority Report, another quality outlet I must say. And actually in another clip on this show, she vehemently disagrees with Cenk on the Debt Ceiling crisis, which is always good to see in these videos because if everyone agrees on everything life would be pretty boring.
But overall I’ve done this post to highlight the difference between right-wing media, “corporate” (or as they’d call it “centrist” media, and progressive media. You can probably tell which I feel is the most reliable. JLP
Since the formation of the Irish State its government has been led by either Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael or as we have now, a combination of the two. Or to put it another way, the country has only even known a right-leaning government.
Meanwhile the left has always been fragmented, marginalized and kept at arm’s length in a variety of different ways, and calling the ruling “Civil War” duopoly out has always been difficult to do without finding yourself branded as “radical”.
Well fair play to Independent TD Catherine Connolly of the Galway West constituency for not only telling both Taoiseach and Tánaiste what she thinks of their policies, but also for doing it with amazing dignity. This is what the Dáil is meant to be for, representing the people, and I’m pretty sure there are a whole lot of Irish people who would like to say those words to this pair.
Next step is convincing enough voters to elect a government that can lead us away from the FFFG mindset (and btw many include the Irish Labour Party in that, one which Connolly herself used to be a member but left in 2006).
The Marriage Equality and Repeal the 8th referenda results were great, but if we’re not careful the losing minority could be organised and well-funded enough to fight back, just look what’s happening in the USA.
He clearly believes, like most uber rich probably do, that the world revolves around him. The entire human race is represented by three stick figures on each line and he is one of them.
More importantly for this web page, these varying depictions of the “left/right” nature of political thought are completely different each time, which to me proves that it is completely arbitrary. If Elon is proclaiming that they have these definitions for these particular years, why can’t we attribute our own?
Which leads me conveniently back to the most important point I want to get across in this blog, and you will see me repeat it in several posts. If you come across FPP and don’t leave it at least knowing that I firmly believe this, then I will have failed.
In my humble opinion, no matter what year it is, the true centre of a line representing political ideology is one that contains people who want a democratically elected government to provide equal opportunities for all of its citizens. As you go to the right, you have people who are supporting increasing amounts of inequality. As you move to the left, you have people who are more interested in fighting/punishing those on the right than actually working to establish/maintain that equality. Any other depiction of what is defined by “left” and “right” is an attempt to distort, usually from the “right” because they represent a minority of people but currently have a lot of power which they use to influence the masses.
THIS is what I’d like to talk about when it comes to Elon Musk, not whether or not he wants to add an edit button,. JLP
Rachel Maddow has been on hiatus for quite a while now, working on other projects which is a good thing for her because while her 5-nights-a-week MSNBC show is must watch TV, the “corporate Democrat” nature of the network clearly holds her back.
What makes her presentations so compelling, for me anyway, is that whatever the topical news subject might be covering, she not only goes back several steps in the timeline while researching it, she also seems to bring you through her own process of learning as well. So while she might open her show talking about something like the presidency of Boris Yelstin, her verbal corkboard shows takes you from there to the Q Anon conspiracy.
But far be it from me to provide anything else that might act as a “spoiler” for the classic Maddow experience contained within the following two videos, all that is left is for me to strongly recommend just watch them, enjoy and learn. JLP
HERE ARE SOME OF THE REPLIES I GOT FROM EWAN’S MINIONS…
“Listen to those who know what they’re talking about!” is the shittest advice of 2021. Who? The corrupt rats on pharmas payroll? Media? Restriction junkies? My mate knows all about heroin, but I don’t listen to him when he tells me it’s class. I can think for myself, always.
Virtue signalling gobshite.
Wonder would Dr Harold Shipman’s patients agree? And Dr Jack Kevorkian. Dr Carl Clauberg, Dr Josef Mengele and Dr John Bodkin Adams to name a few ‘health’ experts.
Keep taking the OxyContin. It’s not addictive if you keep doubling the dose.
I know the drill..never question an expert. Ever. Under any circumstances. Even on matters which over lap with social policy. Nope never. Just obey. [reply > Not what I said but hey, see what you want to see, whatever gets you angry.]
Jeff, your wee nappy wearing mate blocked me before I could tell him some scientists and medical professionals I listen to.Pensive face Let him know. Robert Malone (Inventor on mRNA vaxx tech) : [His work has focused on mRNA technology, pharmaceuticals, and drug repurposing research. During the COVID-19 pandemic, he has been criticized for promoting misinformation about the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines.[ Mike Yeadon (Former VP at Pfizer) [Michael Yeadon is a British anti-vaccine activist and retired pharmacologist who attracted media attention for making false or unfounded claims about the COVID-19 pandemic and the safety of COVID-19 vaccines.] John Ioannidis Sunetra Gupta Martin Kulldorf Luc Montagnier
I have long been interested to know what actually happened in Ballymun – not enough to do extensive research mind you, and one notable sidebar from this thread is that if the were to meet me, his first impression might be to see me as some kind of “Rugby Dad/Newstalk Niall” hybrid, but still I was grateful to him for tweeting this extensive info so I thought I’d share it here. Check out the link at the end to watch the video if the embed isn’t working.
Everything below this line of the post was written or produced by the author in question. JLP
Since Ballymun comes up a lot in discussions of the housing crisis, here’s a thread debunking some of the most persistent myths/misconceptions/lies about the community.
(I made a film about this some years ago, but people were largely indifferent, so this is a capsule summary).
Rugby dads, professional gentrifiers and Newstalk Nialls generally reference Ballymun as a “knee-jerk response” to a housing crisis (mostly false), a utopian project (totally false) and a failed housing model (also false).
The truth is, Ballymun was the Irish state doing what it does “best” – the bare minimum of public provision it can get away with. There was no failure of utopian planning because there was no utopian planning. Promises of cinemas, bowling alleys and amenities were always false.
That said, the blocks themselves were built to a French system and were generally sound, bright and spacious.
Ours had a large living room with private balcony, a large bedroom, two smaller bedrooms, a bathroom with bath and constant hot water, and a decent-sized kitchen.
But it swiftly became apparent that Dublin Corporation (now Dublin City Council) – whose senior officials always resented the fact that the National Building Agency had been entrusted with the lucrative project – had no intention of providing even basic services or maintenance.
In the early years, the community itself plugged this gap. Communal areas were scrupulously maintained by residents. To the best of its ability, an impoverished community stood in for the absent state. It built structures of mutual support and recreation that endured for decades.
Eventually, however, successive economic crises overwhelmed residents. From the 80s onwards, several waves of heroin addiction swept over the area, on the heels of a prescriptions drugs epidemic.
A beleaguered community lost the ability to do the Corpo’s job for it.
While the plethora of community organisations rallied and survived, the area deteriorated physically and economically.
Ballymunners made numerous earnest attempts to engage the state over the heads of the Corpo, which had by now largely abandoned the area to its fate.
These heroic efforts kept the community above water, until, in the late 90s, government finally yielded to pressure and announced a Regeneration project (an earlier attempt in the early 90s having been abandoned at about 10% completion).
This was to be enacted by a new limited company wholly owned by Dublin Corporation – Ballymun Regeneration Limited (BRL).
Inspired by Blairite thinking/models from the UK (and shipping over some of the same personnel), BRL swiftly decided on total demolition of the high rises
It should be explained here that outright gentrification (displacement and replacement of the community by more affluent residents) was off the table for a variety of reasons; chiefly, the fact that the community itself had forced the state’s hand and had to be won over.
While BRL carried out an elaborate pantomime of consultation (within already-defined parameters), its mission became clear:
Since the area couldn’t be gentrified, an attempt would be made to gentrify its people instead.
This would entail the forcible destruction, not just of the physical infrastructure of the community (tower blocks, green spaces, centralised shopping areas, community centres etc), but of all communal experiences of life in Ballymun.
BRL was quite explicit about this. The purpose of the Regeneration was to liquidate the existing community of Ballymun, with its communal forms of solidarity, and to allow residents to be reborn as responsible, market-oriented individual consumers.
The hodge-podge of architectural styles (sidenote: between 1997 and 2014, BRL spent €98.7m on professional fees alone) were all designed to achieve this.
Gone were the sweeping open spaces and the central meeting places that had fostered a community.
In their place – isolated developments that encouraged, and enforced, suspicion and exclusion of all but one’s immediate neighbours.
Ballymun’s vast network of community organisations – from football clubs to legal aid to tenants’ associations – was systematically dismantled.
These relics of non-market community identity (as BRL saw them) were brought under the banner of a BRL-run Neighbourhood Council, which was run into the ground and dissolved within a couple of years.
A tangent before the conclusion – it is shameful that anyone still parrots BRL’s mantra of “mixed income housing”.
The thinking here (explicitly stated in Ballymun) is that well-adjusted middle-class residents act as role models for their feckless working-class neighbours – vile
The Regeneration was, by every metric except BRL’s own, an abject failure. Estimates of its cost vary from €1bn-€2bn.
Ballymun was destroyed – socially, economically and culturally. The private sector investment on which BRL had based its Blairite fantasies never materialised.
The moral of the story:
When you see planners, politicians and pundits warn of “creating new Ballymuns”, always remember that they, and people who think like them, were given 20 years and a blank cheque to “fix” Ballymun according to their own ideology.
They utterly failed.
What really stuck in their craw about Ballymun was not the widespread, visible poverty (after all, these people have created a city strewn with the tents of the homeless), but the forms of solidarity and resistance to market ideology which Ballymunners carved out for themselves.
So yeah, if a politician, planner or developer arrives in your town with a “regeneration masterplan”, run them out of there before it’s too late.