Saturday, April 23, 2022

Jackson Hinkle is a little bitch

I really didn't plan on writing this post.  Thought it a lot, but planned to avoid it.

Then he posted a video and Marci e-mailed about it.  "I Was Wrong."  Went up yesterday.  She made the mistake of watching.  I would've too, Marci.

She thought the little bitch was going to apologize for bringing on convicted sex offender, 


I would've too.  


But he's not apologizing for the damage he did to survivors and their families and friends for bring on register sex offender, sent to prison sex offender Scott Ritter.  


No, he's not going to do that.  


He's a dumb little pice of shit who thinks he's smart.  I wish I knew him.  I'd punch his fsce in.  I'd do that within 30 minutes of meeting him because he's a smug little bitch who thinks he's a big man.  And over six feet tall, I could beat the crap out of that little bitch and make clear to him that he had nothing to strut about.


When he did his podcast drunk, with a drunken male friend, and they'd brought two drunken women back to the studio, I wrote it off as youthful stupidity.


Little Jacky Hinkle's not even 25.  He's a stupid piece of crap who thinks he knows everything and has some sort of homoerotic obsession with Jimmy Dore.  (Jimmy's a funny guy, I'm not denying that, and he's a smart man.  But Little Jacky's obsessed -- to the point that she picture him on all fours in front of a seated Jimmy and his snout in Jimmy's crotch.)


If he had any guts, if he was any kind of a man, even a young man, he'd apologize to his viewers not just for using his platform to try to f**k some drunk woman but for bringing on Scott Ritter.


That was an insult and it made clear that there are people who will try take back the night and then are little Jackies who will hold hands with convicted sex offenders and not even have the guts (or balls -- Little Jacky's got no balls) to tell their audience, "This man I'm speaking with?  Went to prison in 2009 for being a sex offender."


Little Jacky Hinkle, playing with is dinkle, wishing some day his balls would descend but right now pretending he's a man.


For anyone thinking, "Mike's threatening to beat up Little Jacky!!!!"


No, I'm not.  


I'm lucky.  I don't know him personally.  If I met him tomorrow, I know all I need to know and I would walk away. 


But if I had met him a year or so ago and we had been talking, it would take about 30 minutes of his bullshit, faux man nonsense before I would've kicked his ass.  


Go play with that tiny dinkle, Little Jacky Hinkle.


Here's Glenn Greenwald doing work to be proud of.





Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"


 Friday, April 22, 2022.  A few electoral related issues.


Sabby  Sabs had a really important video this week and we noted it in an entry on its own but I want to be sure it's in a snapshot.  Before that, this will probably be a shorter snapshot.  My blood suger's out of whack and I'm having to stop and start -- hurling and dictating do not go totether well.  


But I actually want to start with a REvolutionary BLACKOUT issue.  They had a good video that we've noted on its own already this week (yesterday, I believe).  There was one thing that needed clarification.  It was taking on Sam Seder (yea!)  and this is ot to defend Seder and I was going to let it pass but then Bernie.


Sam was in a debate with a person it is not our goal to promote so we're not even going to name him.  RB was reviewing that debate and they noted that Sam lost -- which doesn't suprrise me.  We are not and have never been  fan of Sam.  "We" meaning me myself and meaning this website.  We parted ways, this website, with Sam in January of 2005 when he revealed hmself to be  acheap whore and one who woud promote corporate interests (Simon Rosenberg).  Rosenberg was spitting on the LGBT community and going off on prominent African-American members of the Democratic Party and that was okay with Sam.  So he can rot in hell, I'm not here to defend him and that's before you factor in that I know Janeane Garofalo, I like her and I consider her a friend.  I don't ever forgive how he ousted her from her program.  


So in the debate Sam made some point about people who weren't even Democrats.  The ine wasn't qutoed.  But Sam was around in 2008 and a lot of peple weren't.  If he was referring to 2008, I do know what he meant and I do think it's an isseue if Bernie runs again.


In 2008, a bi-racial man who was attractive ran for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination -- actually that started in 2007 -- and he wasn't connecting with the voters.  John Edwards and his crew of sexist -- female bloggers, you know who you are -- thought he'd win the nomination.  Grabby hands and his cult couldn't see the writing ont he wall.  The person who coul've won it then was Hillary Clinton. 


Because Barack was pretty and a novelty, all type of sowoning took place.  I still rank the most embarrassing moment when Martha read an e-mail from Daivd Lindorff over the phone to me about how people should support Barack because "as a Black man who did drugs" he would be more radical than anything the system could handle.  Barack has been called many things by many thinking people but no one with a real and functioning brain has ever called him radical.  And never will.


But there were radicals latching on to him -- the friendship with Bernardine Dohrn and her trophy husband wasn't the only thing there.  The Weather Underground's Carl stopped giving himself his monthly breast exam long enough to start a fux group for Barack.    Carl couldn't hide what he was for the most part.  But many did.  And if Democrats don't want non-Democrat  impacting their primaries, they can make them a closed primary.  But here's the problem, a lot of them showed up writing pieces as Democrats.  As a Democrat, this is what our party stands for this is . . .


And they weren't Democrats.  Be a Socialist, be a Communist , be whatever (yes, even a a Republican), but don't present yourself as a Democrat in order to sway potential overs when you are not a Democrats.


As we noted in real time, that ticked off a lot of people.  In 2016, Hillar.y Clinton, again seeking the Democratic Party's presidential nomination, tried to latch onto that angry sentiment left over from 2008 with her remarks about how Bernie wasn't a Democrat (he's a Socialist) and shouldn't be allowed to even run in the primary.  She'd already picked her Republican nominee, right?  (Her campaign pushed the coverage of Donald in the GOP primary because they thought he'd be the easiest to defeat in a general election.)    But here's the problem, Bernie couldn't have run withut the party's okay.  As a sitting senator that the Democrats had a policy -- that dated back to Bernie being in the House --which eant that they would never challenge him in an election by running an actual Democrat for the post, Bernie wouldn't have done anything to anger the Party and he ran with the Party's blessing.  They didn't think he could win (and, as we now know, various people like Donna Brazile were working to harm his campaign while pretending to be impartial).


They let him run.


So that was a stupid argument.  Bernie's enver pretended he wasn't a Scocialist.


But Bernie has pretended  And that's why we're addressing the point now.


As a Socialist, if  he runs again -- as he says he's thinking about doing -- it will be with the Democratic Party's leadership's approval.  


He would get them attention that they would not otherwise receive.  And his 'left' or left positions would bring people into the fold -- that he would later try to sheepherd to whatever corporatist won the nomination.


He serves the sheep hearding role, yes.  But no one ever comments on the other role he serves.  By letting Bernie run and letting him lose, they make the argument that these are good policies, yes, but the man supporting them couldn't win, so we need to just keep working on ait a little bit harderr.


That's how they deny the overwhelmingly popular Medicare For All issue.


He is not helping anyone.


And no one with self-respect who had seen their campaign worked against in 2016 and 2020 would even consider running again.


Bernie has no self respect and has clearly accepted his fole as a sheep hearder and as a denier of needed policies (such as Medicare For All).


He shouldn't run.  If he does, no one should be taken in by him.  


He folds every time, which is bad enough, but then he tries to whore out the people who believed in the policies and issues he said he believed in.  We can't afford his nonsense.  He's been a lousy US senator and I've said that long ago.  (And had to hear in 2016 when some Bernie supporters were upset that Hillary's campaign was using issues we'd pointed out in years previously.  Like when the VA scandal broke about the deaths from waiting for care broke and Bernie, then Chair of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, admonished everyone at the start of the hearing, insisting that that issue would be dealt with but they were to focus on today's issue instead . . . holistic medicine.  Wow Bernie, you are so uninspiring.)


We can't afford him.  If he runs, I hope people don't mistake him for anything of value again.






Okay, her's Sabby's video.  It's important and she's raising serious issue as usual.








I would love to comment on it but my blood sugar is really low and I'm dizzy so I've got to go throw up again.  Nouri al-Maliki will be noted in Saturday's entry -- for his words.  I think it can wait.


We're doing a Zomm at 6 with the East Coast so I have to stop here and hopefully get over throwing up and get done with it.



The following sites updated:






Here's C.I.'s " 

Posted by at