Thursday, October 11, 2018

THIS JUST IN! ALYSSA LOVES THE SMELL OF HER OWN FARTS!

BULLY BOY PRESS &    CEDRIC'S BIG MIX   -- THE KOOL AID TABLE

MIDDLE AGED MONSTER ALYSSA MILANO IS UP TO IT AGAIN.

Alyssa Milano Retweeted CAP Action
Peoples wages are flat while corporate profits are booming. Anyone who believes the is making decisions based on your best interests is mistaken.


BECAUSE BILL GATES HAS YOUR BEST INTERESTS AT HEART?

TYPICAL B.S. FROM A FAILED ACTRESS WITH NO CAREER WHO IS TOO STUPID TO REALIZE JUST HOW UNEDUCATED SHE IS.

REACHED FOR COMMENT, THESE REPORTERS ASKED ALYSSA WHY SHE BELIEVED MILLIONARES OF ONE POLITICAL STRIPE WERE AWFUL AND THE ONES FROM THE OTHER WERE WONDERFUL, SHE MUMBLBED, "DUH DUH DUH I DID NOT GET MY TALKING POINTS ON THAT DUH DUH DUH I AM STUPID BUT I TWEET CONSTANTLY HOPING THAT MAKES ME LOOK SMART DUH DUH DUH IF I KEEP MY HEAD UP MY ASS LIKE THIS, I CAN SMELL MY OWN FARTS.  OH! THAT WAS A RIPE ONE!"


No, the Iraq War hasn't ended.

In a new opinion piece at THE BOSTON GLOBE, Linda J. Blimes wonders, "Is the US Forgetting The Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?"  And what I say to that is, "Goodness me, Blimey, I thought you were dead.  We certainly haven't heard from you -- or Joe -- in forever.  Ten long years of silence, right?"  From her piece:
Ten years ago in “The Three Trillion Dollar War,” economist Joseph E. Stiglitz and I predicted — controversially — that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan would cost far more than anyone expected. Fast forward to today. The total bill has spiraled to over $5 trillion, most of it paid for on the national “credit card.” Nearly 7,000 American troops and a similar number of contractors have given up their lives. With no political end game in sight, more than 15,000 troops remain on the ground. And yet Congress pays almost no attention to the wars — even though the cost continues to run at more than $70 billion a year.


She has to reference the ten years ago because she and Joe are not objective actors.  They fell silent for Barack Obama's two-terms because they supported his presidential campaigns and his presidency and that took priority over noting the costs of war.  Barack is gone and Donald Trump is in the White House so suddenly Linda's found her voice -- IT'S A MIRACLE!  Found her voice, please note, not when Donald Trump was referring to the the cost of war back in February.  Dropping back to theFebruary 13th snapshot:



Let's start with the stupidity.

You really don't need to harp on everything Donald Trump Tweets or says.  But if you do and you call him out, you need to be correct.

Kyle is wrong -- no surprise, he works for blowhard Lawrence O'Donnell.

Kyle Griffin Retweeted Donald J. Trump
WaPo Fact Check: Trump has repeated this number at least 21 times. “It's flat wrong.” Experts say the U.S. spent about $1.8 trillion on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan from 2001-2017. (Plus, Afghanistan is not actually in the Middle East.)
Kyle Griffin added,




 

 



I don't care what some WASHINGTON POST link says.  I'm not even going to go there.  And I'm fully aware that Kyle was in Australia for two years and apparently didn't think that a war the US was (and remains) engaged in was something he needed to follow.

"Experts"?

"Experts" say many things.  Doesn't make them right.

Kyle types, "Experts say the U.S. spent about $1.8 trillion on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan from 2001-2017."

I don't know what"experts" he's citing and really don't turn to THE WASHINGTON POST for reality on Iraq due to its history (only THE NEW YORK TIMES has a worst history).

But I do know his statement is wrong.

From March 2013, Daniel Trotta (REUTERS) reported,"The U.S. war in Iraq has cost $1.7 trillion with an additional $490 billion in benefits owed to war veterans, expenses that could grow to more than $6 trillion over the next four decades counting interest, a study released on Thursday said."

That was almost five years ago.

And that was Iraq alone.

So maybe next time, when you're going to town on him, know your facts so you don't end up looking like an idiot.

In November of 2017, THE COSTS OF WAR PROJECT estimated that by the start of 2018, the wars (post 9/11) would cost the US 5.6 trillion.  That ended up being the headline in November when it was reported on.  Now read the actual report when veterans issues are added  in or just skip to Table Six where you'll find the cost is expected to be $7.9 trillion when veterans expenses and interest (the US government did not increase taxes to pay for the wars, they borrowed money to do so) are added in.

THE COSTS OF WAR PROJECT is generally considered the expert on the issue -- not THE WASHINGTON POST.  It's run by Brown University's Watson Institute.


They say $7.9 trillion.


So not only has Kyle Griffin's 'fact' check made Donald Trump look more informed, it's also raised serious issues about the intelligence level at MSNBC's THE LAST WORD.



Linda didn't speak up then because she's a partisan.  Don't mistake her for an independent voice or for someone who tells the truth.  She stays silent unless she sees a personal, political benefit.  Which is why, in October, she's writing about the costs of war when she could have spoken out in February when, remember, the press actually was paying attention to the costs.

The press was paying attention not because they gave a damn about the costs but because they wanted to mock Donald Trump.  And because the cost was being used to mock Donald Trump, Linda stayed silent.  She allowed MSNBC and others to promote the lie that the costs of the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars was less than 2 billion dollars.


If there's a problem, Linda, and I agree with you that there is, part of that problem is you.  Look no further than your mirror.









Sunday, September 30, 2018

THIS JUST IN! ALYSSA MILANO IS A CERTIFIED IDIOT!

BULLY BOY PRESS &    CEDRIC'S BIG MIX   -- THE KOOL AID TABLE

FORMER ACTRESS ALYSSA MILANO IS ALL UP IN EVERYBODY'S BUSINESS -- THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU GET OLD AND UGLY AND NO ONE WANTS TO HIRE YOU.

SO WE DECIDED TO GET UP IN HER BUSINESS.

REMEMBER WHEN SHE MADE DANNY PINTAURO'S HIV DIAGNOSIS ALL ABOUT HER?

AND HOW HER SHOCK IN 2015 MADE IT CLEAR THAT SHE HAD NO CONTACT WITH HER FORMER CO-STAR?



When we ended the show there were no cell phones, there were no computers, there was no Internet, so it would have been a more difficult time to keep in touch. But he’s always — all those people from that show are always in my heart, always. They’re a part of me on like a cellular level. You know, and he’s going to do great things now!



THERE WERE NO COMPUTERS IN APRIL 1992 (APRIL 1992 BEING WHEN WHO'S THE BOSS ENDED)?

OMG!  WHAT A WORLD!  HOW DID IBM MAKE MONEY!

OH, WAIT, THERE WERE COMPUTERS.

BUT THERE WAS NO INTERNET!

OH, WAIT, ALYSSA LIED AGAIN.  TIM BERNERS-LEE IS SAID TO HAVE INVENTED THE WORLD WIDE WEB IN 1990 ("WORLD WIDE WEB" IS "WWW" IN THE WEB ADDRESSES, ALYSSA MILANO).  AUGUST 6, 1991 IS SAID TO BE WHEN THE WORLD WIDE WEB WAS OPENED TO THE PUBLIC.

BUT THERE WERE NO CELL PHONES!

MARCH 13, 1984 WAS WHEN MOTOROLA SOLD THEIR FIRST HAND-HELD CELL PHONE.  

ALYSSA MILANO -- DUMB AS A DOOR KNOB.  MAYBE IF SHE'D EVER GONE TO A REAL SCHOOL AND NOT MISTAKEN THE SET OF WHO'S THE BOSS FOR A COLLEGE UNIVERSITY, THE DUMB IDIOT MIGHT KNOW SOMETHING.

INSTEAD, SHE IS AN IDIOT.

REACHED FOR COMMENT, MILANO TOLD THESE REPORTERS, "MY HUSBAND IS NOT CHEATING ON ME!  SO WHAT IF HE'S YOUNGER THAN ME!  SO WHAT IF HE KEEPS SNEAKING OFF FOR LATE LUNCHES!  SO WHAT IF HE TOLD ME I WAS BOTH FAT AND UGLY!  HE LOVES ME!  HE LOVES ME!  HE LOVES ME!"

REMINDED THAT THE QUESTION WAS WHY SHE HAD LIED ABOUT THE INTERNET AND COMPUTERS AND CELL PHONES?

"OH WHO CARES?  IT'S NOT LIKE I WANTED TO HANG WITH DANNY.   IF I HAD, I WOULD'VE FOUND A WAY TO STAY IN CONTACT.  I HATED HIM AND HE WAS A LOSER.  IF HE DIDN'T GET HIV, I WOULD'VE KEPT IGNORING HIM.  IN FACT, MY FIRST THOUGHT WAS, 'OH, S**T! NOW I'M GOING TO HAVE TO PRETEND I LIKE HIM'."


Cher's version of "The Winner Takes It All" from her new album (released today) DANCING QUEEN.   Cher's an important musical voice.  Margaret Kimberley's an important voice for justice.  Kollibri terre Sonnenblume (COUNTERPUNCH) interviews Margaret:

Kollibri terre Sonnenblume: How do you react when people are like – as some political scientists recently said– that Trump is the, quote, “worst president ever.”
Margaret Kimberley: It means they don’t like him. That’s all it means. “Worst” based on what? Did he invade another country? I mean, look at what they’ve done. How they’ve rehabilitated George Bush. Depending on which number you believe, he killed a minimum of half a million people in Iraq. Maybe one million. But Trump is worse? Now maybe before he leaves office he’ll do something equally as horrible, but he’s certainly not worst right now.


It's called perspective and it's lacking when the likes of Barbra Streisand take time out from shopping in their own personal malls and cloning their dogs to try to be 'political.'  They say stupid things that reveal how shallow and pathetic their lives are, stupid things like Colin Powell is "decent people."  Sorry, I'm not in the mood for some ugly bitch like Barbra Streisand -- who has no formal education and no practical education (go back to speaking of Zen Buddhism, Babsie), thinking she can rewrite history.

While she was doing MEET THE FOCKERS or whatever other abortion she called a film, the rest of us were dealing with the liar Colin Powell.  Here's Norman Solomon in 2005:

Powell’s televised U.N. speech exuded great confidence and authoritative judgment. But he owed much of his touted credibility to the fact that he had long functioned inside a media bubble shielding him from direct challenge. It might puzzle an American to read later, in a book compiled by the London-based Guardian, that Powell’s much-ballyhooed speech went over like a lead balloon. “The presentation was long on assertion and muffled taped phone calls,  but short on killer facts,” the book said. “It fell flat.”
Fell flat? Well it did in Britain, where a portion of the mainstream press immediately set about engaging in vigorous journalism that ripped apart many of Powell’s assertions within days. But not on the western side of the Atlantic, where Powell’s star turn at the United Nations elicited an outpouring of media adulation. In the process of deference to Powell, many liberals were among the swooners.
In her Washington Post column the morning after Powell spoke, Mary McGrory proclaimed that “he persuaded me.” She wrote: “The cumulative effect was stunning.” And McGrory, a seasoned and dovish political observer, concluded: “I’m not ready for war yet. But Colin Powell has convinced me that it might be the only way to stop a fiend, and that if we do go, there is reason.”
In the same edition, Post columnist Richard Cohen shared his insight that Powell was utterly convincing: “The evidence he presented to the United Nations — some of it circumstantial, some of it absolutely bone-chilling in its detail — had to prove to anyone that Iraq not only hasn’t accounted for its weapons of mass destruction but without
a doubt still retains them. Only a fool — or possibly a Frenchman — could conclude otherwise.”
Inches away, Post readers found Jim Hoagland’s column with this lead:
Colin Powell did more than present the world with a convincing and detailed X-ray of Iraq’s secret weapons and terrorism programs yesterday. He also exposed the enduring bad faith of several key members of the U.N. Security Council when it comes to Iraq and its “web of lies,” in Powell’s phrase.
Hoagland’s closing words sought to banish doubt: “To continue to say that the Bush administration has not made its case, you must now believe that Colin Powell lied in the most serious statement he will ever make, or was taken in by manufactured evidence. I don’t believe that. Today, neither should you.”
On the opposite page the morning after Powell’s momentous U.N. speech, a Washington Post editorial was figuratively on the same page as the Post columnists. Under the headline “Irrefutable,” the newspaper laid down its line for rationality: “After Secretary of State Colin L. Powell’s presentation to the United Nations Security
Council yesterday, it is hard to imagine how anyone could doubt that Iraq possesses weapons of mass destruction.”
Also smitten was the editorial board of the most influential U.S. newspaper leaning against the push for war. Hours after Powell finished his U.N. snow job, the New York Times published an editorial with a mollified tone — declaring that he “presented the United Nations and a global television audience yesterday with the most
powerful case to date that Saddam Hussein stands in defiance of Security Council resolutions and has no intention of revealing or surrendering whatever unconventional weapons he may have.”
By sending Powell to address the Security Council, the Times claimed, President Bush “showed a wise concern for international opinion.” And the paper contended that “Mr. Powell’s presentation was all the more convincing because he dispensed with apocalyptic invocations of a struggle of good and evil and focused on shaping a sober, factual case against Mr. Hussein’s regime.”
Later, in mid-September 2003, straining to justify Washington’s refusal to let go of the occupation of Iraq, Colin Powell used the language of a venture capitalist: “Since the United States and its coalition partners have invested a great deal of political capital, as well as financial resources, as well as the lives of our young men and women — and we have a large force there now — we can’t be expected to suddenly just step aside.”
Now, after so much clear evidence has emerged to discredit the entire U.S. war effort, Colin Powell still can’t bring himself to stand up and account for his crucial role. Instead, he’s leaving it to a former aide to pin blame on those who remain at the top of the Bush administration. But Powell was an integral part of the war propaganda

machinery. And we can hardly expect the same media outlets that puffed him up at crucial times to now scrutinize their mutual history.


It is hilarious that the cross-eyed Barbra is pimping a song about hating lies and liars while she's also insisting that Colin Powell is a decent person.  He's a f**king liar who is responsible for the deaths of  millions.  He lied to the United Nations, he knew he was lying.  He lied to get the country into war.  You can also check out Ava and my "TV Review: Barbara and Colin remake The Way We Were" from 2005 and I'd suggest you look into the late Robert Parry's work on this topic as well (there should be at least one link to Parry in Ava and my piece).  There's no need for lies and if Barbra wants to fight lies she can start by stop lying herself.  Cheap whore, that's all she ever was, it's all she's ever been.  She's molested her own talent in such a way that she's produced the most mediocre career anyone could imagine.  That's bad.  But pimping Colin Powell as "decent"?  After that lying speech?  Babs needs to go back to cloning her dead dog and other things that fat-assed, ridiculous and wealthy women do when they've got no real life or connection to one.

Last February, Jon Schwarz (INTERCEPT) examined Colin's selling of the war:
COLIN POWELL DELIVERED his presentation making the case for war with Iraq at the United Nations 15 years ago, on February 5, 2003.
As much criticism as Powell received for this — he’s called it “painful” and something that will “always be a part of my record” — it hasn’t been close to what’s justified. Powell, who was secretary of state under President George W. Bush, was much more than just horribly mistaken: He fabricated “evidence” and ignored repeated warnings that what he was saying was false.
Unfortunately, Congress never investigated Powell’s use of the intelligence he was given, so we don’t know many of the specifics. Even so, what did reach the public record in other ways is extremely damning. While the corporate media has never taken a close look at this record, we can go through Powell’s presentation line by line to demonstrate the chasm between what he knew and what he told the world. As you’ll see, there’s quite a lot to say about it.

Jon goes through the speech point by point.  If you're stupid enough to believe a hagged out fool who is so addicted to fillers that she now has chipmunk cheeks, you really should read through Jon's report.  And you should grasp that Colin Powell is a War Criminal and that pre-dates Iraq.
Replying to 
The Queen knighted US war criminal Colin Powell who covered up the My Lai Massacre.




Colin Powell: This Man is a War Criminal! http://nblo.gs/gnqg2





Barbra doesn't like liars?  She keeps forgetting to note that she has a financial interest in the remake of A STAR IS BORN.  Her ex-lover Jon Peters can't promote the film.  Too many women have come out to talk about how he harassed and raped them.  So Warner Brothers really needs Barbra to talk it up.  She doesn't like liars?  All these interviews praising A STAR IS BORN that never manage to mention that Babs has a financial interest in the project?  That's called deception.  There's no whore like an old whore.



"Why?"
"Bees"