mileo ventimglia, the little mermaid


that's milo ventimglia on 'the jennifer hudson show.'

milo now stars in 'the company you keep.'  he's previously starred in 'heroes,' 'chosen' and 'this is us.'  and, by the way, there was no new episode of 'the company you keep' this week.

i like milo.

what surprises me is that i like 'the little mermaid.'  not the original.  i think the colors were vivid but it was poorly drawn - it looked more like hana barbara than disney.  but this live-action version coming out may 26th?  i really want to see it.  melissa mccarthy is amazing in the trailer and i really like the new mermaid.  halle bailey.  i didn't watch 'grown-ish' and i haven't seen her anything before but, in the trailer, she really seems to capture every needed note and then some. 

it really looks good.

'the little mermaid' may 26th

let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

Thursday, April 27, 2023.  In his eager and desperate push to be the next Republican nominee for president Ron DeSantis takes a dump on Ronald Reagan, DEMOCRACY NOW! remembers Harry  Belafonte, Tulis Gabbard lies again (a letter is not a research paper, THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER is not a medical journal and if you cite an actual study you need to cite it, not 'create' things it does not say), and much more.

Instead of working for the people of Florida, Ron DeSantis, having finished his  book tour through the US, is now globe trotting and, sadly, that means he's opening his stupid mouth.  He did so in Israel where he listed off 'accomplishments' as he tried to pass himself off as the nation's long-lost brother in Christ (yes, I know, but that's what he did).  And he felt the need to bond with them -- War Criminal to War Criminal? -- by noting the 'sacrifices:'

We saw a war of attrition waged by Egypt and other Arab states in the ensuing years.

We saw a war on Yom Kippur.

We saw Israel eliminate Iraq's nuclear reactor.

We’ve seen Intifadas and the increase in rise of Palestinian Arab terrorism.

Wait -- what was that the nuclear reactor?

Israel was the aggressor, of course, but that's not even my point.  

Dunce wants the nomination of which political party for president?

I was on the phone with a board member at George Washington University and we were talking, naturally, about what an embarrassment transphobe and FOX "NEWS" whore Jonathan Turley is (Jonathan disgraces GWU daily with his blog and his ravings) when we talked about Ron's hideous speech and I was informed I could utilize GWU to note how stupid Ron is -- I could do that because heaven knows that Jonathan Turley won't do a damn thing to make the university look better. 

International bodies were quick to respond. The International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) Board of Governors condemned the attack in mid-June 1981, and in September the IAEA Conference both condemned the strike and suspended all technical assistance to Israel. On June 19, the United Nations Security Council condemned the attack as a violation of the United Nations charter, stating that Iraq should be compensated and calling for Israel to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and place its own nuclear program under IAEA safeguards. In November, the United Nations General Assembly followed suit, condemning Israel for a premeditated act of aggression.

Condemning the attack, the United States suspended the shipment of F-16s to Israel because the strike raised questions whether they had been used for legitimate self-defense purposes as required by law.   Nevertheless, the Reagan administration was not about to re-evaluate policy toward Israel and the deliveries resumed in a few months.

So the action Ron's invoking is one the US government publicly condemned -- when Ronald Reagan -- Republican Party hero -- was president.  It was so bad that there was even a suspension on F-16s. 

But, hey, that's just public history.

When a dumb ass like Ron has to suck up, he'll lie and whore anyway he can.  

It'll be interesting to see how many more heroes of his own party the miniscule Ron throws under the bus as he tries to win the Republican Party's nomination.  

By the way, on Jonathan Turley, good work Marcia.  The board is aware that he's ignoring the case of Montana legislator Zooey Zephyr (see Marcia here and here) despite it being something he would cover and someone he would defend . . . if she were right-wing.  He ignores all violence aimed against the trans community but if AnTIFA or anyone else defends the trans community, enter right-wing Jonathan to attack their defenders.  He's not fooling anyone anymore.  He's a disgrace and most of the GWU faculty are not trying to avoid him.  Whores are never popular in academia.

Truth tellers are popular and are important mentors and leaders.  We lost one on Tuesday, "Harry Belafonte."  DEMOCRACY NOW! noted his passing in the segment below:

AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman, as we continue our coverage of the life and legacy of Harry Belafonte. He died Tuesday at the age of 96 here in New York of congestive heart failure.

In 2003, on February 15th, he spoke before hundreds of thousands of people in New York City. It was a freezing cold day. It was a massive rally calling on the United States and President Bush not to invade Iraq.

HARRY BELAFONTE: Today is a historic and a proud day in the name of America. The world has sat by with tremendous anxiety and with a great fear that we did not exist. They had been told and they had felt that what our country, with its press and the leaders in the administration have said, we, today, invalidate all that. We stand for peace. We stand for the truth of what is at the heart of the American people.

This is not the first time that we as a people have been misled by the leadership. We were misled by those who created the falseness of the Bay of Tonkin, which falsely led us into a war with Vietnam, a war that we could not and did not win. We lied to the American people about Grenada and what was going on in that tiny island. We lied to the American people about Nicaragua, El Salvador, Cuba and many places in the world. And we stand here today to let those people and others know that America is a vast and diverse country, and we are part of the greater truth of what makes our nation. Dr. King once said that if there is — if mankind does not put an end to war, war will put an end to mankind.

AMY GOODMAN: On that day, February 15th, 2003, Harry Belafonte also spoke to Democracy Now! during our live broadcast right behind the stage of the global antiwar protest. Harry detailed his criticism of George W. Bush’s Secretary of State Colin Powell for his role for pushing for the invasion of Iraq.

HARRY BELAFONTE: My comments about General Colin Powell is really not a personal confrontation. Black Americans and many peoples of color have always taken great pride in what those of us who have come from a history of oppression have achieved. And when an individual breaks through and comes into the place where decisions are made that can make a difference, we then have high expectations. Once that is rejected by those who have acquired this position, we may sit in quiet disappointment. But when the person who achieves that distinction then puts him or herself in the service of our oppression and those who create new ways in which to oppress us, that is morally unacceptable. And that is my argument with General Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice. I expect, as do others, that their history should have prepared them for a much better articulation about how to treat people globally.

Most of the people in the world who suffer from tyranny, most of the people who suffer from the tyranny of oppression, the tyranny of hunger, the tyranny of ignorance, the tyranny of HIV/AIDS, there sits terror. And when you look very carefully at what it is that has caused this constant oppression, you will see that somewhere in there, America plays the game. And this gathering here today helps us understand that there is another America that is strong, that is resolute and is made of millions and millions of people. As a matter of fact, we do make the majority voice in this nation, and that we have let the world know that we are in solidarity with those who seek to have other ways than war to settle our grievances.

AMY GOODMAN: In 2006, Harry Belafonte traveled to Venezuela, where he met with President Hugo Chávez. Belafonte’s trip made international headlines when he described President George W. Bush as the “world’s greatest terrorist.”

HARRY BELAFONTE: No matter what the greatest tyrant in the world, the greatest terrorist in the world, George W. Bush, says, we’re here to tell you: Not hundreds, not thousands, but millions of the American people — millions — support your revolution, support your ideas, and, yes, expressing our solidarity with you.

AMY GOODMAN: President Chávez was standing right next to Harry Belafonte. Shortly after Harry returned from Venezuela, he came into our firehouse studio to talk about why he called President George W. Bush a terrorist.

HARRY BELAFONTE: When Katrina took place, there was a great sense of tragic loss for many Americans who saw that terrible tragedy. What we had not anticipated was that our government would have been so negligent and so unresponsive to the plight of hundreds of thousands of people in the region. And in a dilemma that we all face as to what we could do as private citizens to help the folks that were caught in that tragedy, we began to listen to voices that were outside the boundaries of government, the United States government. We listened to voices that came from as far away as Denmark, who offered to send goods and services in emergency, and we also heard the voices of people from Venezuela through their leader, Hugo Chávez, who said that “In this moment of your great tragedy, we, the Venezuelan people, extend all the resources we can summon up to help the plight of those people caught in the Gulf region.”

The United States very abruptly and very arrogantly rejected that offer, while in its stead, we did nothing to bring immediate relief. And as a matter of fact, I must tell you, we’re still quite delinquent in what the peoples of that region need, because we still failed to fully mobilize and meet the needs of the people, particularly in New Orleans, but other places within that region.

I and many other private citizens decided that we would listen very carefully to what people outside of the government were saying, because there was no immediate sense of relief and response to what we were experiencing, the people in Katrina. And so, like others, I went with a delegation of 15 people, at the invitation of the Venezuelan government, to come and to meet with President Chávez and members of his Cabinet to talk about what we could do to help American people caught in this tragedy. …

It is quite curious that we can find billions and billions of dollars to sustain an illegal and immoral war in the Middle East, invading a country that did not provoke us and moving into this this conflict unconstitutionally, even though it had the approval of the Congress. Even the Congress violated the statutes of the Constitution. We were not invaded. There was no threat of an enemy. We unilaterally walked into a country that had no threat to this country, and we invaded it. That’s against the Constitution.

AMY GOODMAN: You call President Bush a terrorist?

HARRY BELAFONTE: I call President Bush a terrorist. I call those around him terrorists, as well: Condoleezza Rice, Rumsfeld, Gonzales in the Justice Department, and certainly Cheney. I think all of these men sit — and women — sit in the midst of an enormous conspiracy that has been unraveling America for the last eight years — six years. It is tragic that the dubious way in which this president acquired power should have begun to unravel the Constitution and the peoples of this country.

Yes, I say that there are people in this country who live in terror. Poverty is terror. Having your Social Security threatened is terror. Having your livelihood as an elderly person slowly disappearing with no replenishment is terror. Students who are dropping out of school because there are no resources to keep us in school is terror. You find people in the streets, watching drugs permeate our communities and destroy our young, it’s a life of terror. And men who sit in charge of that distribution mechanism, which can help the American people overcome these problems and refuse to do so, while giving the rich more money than they’ve ever dreamt of having, while turning around our institutions and redirecting resources from those who are truly in need to those who are already generously endowed, if not hedonistically so, it’s a great tragedy.

AMY GOODMAN: That was Harry Belafonte on Democracy Now! January 30th, 2006. After that interview, we learned Coretta Scott King had died. A dear friend of Coretta Scott King, Harry Belafonte was invited to speak at her funeral. But the invitation to speak was rescinded after George W. Bush announced he was attending Coretta Scott King’s funeral.

They did three other segments on his as well this week -- here, here and here.

A new documentary, BLIX NOT BOMBS, covers the efforts to keep prevent madman Bully Boy Bush from starting his illegal war of choice. Addie Morfoot (VARIETY) reports:


Czech-Swedish filmmaker Greta Stocklassa was only eight when the War on Terror began in 2001. In the years that followed, fellow Swede and former UN weapons inspector, Hans Blix, became a central figure in the investigation into weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. In her documentary “Blix Not Bombs,” Stocklassa interviews Blix, now 94 years old, about the period running up to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq 20 years ago.

In the docu, Blix describes his meetings with George W. Bush and Tony Blair, his frustration when Colin Powell gave his pivotal speech in the UN Security Council, and his feeling of emptiness when the U.S. started the invasion, despite his reports that his team had found no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.   

Greta Stocklassa tells VARIETY:

I would like (audiences) to get acquainted with Hans Blix and his values, because I think peace makers should get more spotlight than war heroes. Regardless of if they agree with Hans or not, I hope audiences think about what their personal role is in making the world a better place or maybe (the film) just incites a love for birds and nature like Hans has… Hopefully it can do both.

The world needs truth tellers.  Sadly, they're in short supply while, on every corner and YOUTUBE page, you can find con artists and whores.

Tulsi Gabbard?  Is she lying?  She's also crazy so we never know if it's a lie or a mental episode with her.  (See Trina's "Crazy Tulsi Gabbard" from last night.)  Tulsi has transitioned to the hate monger she really was.  These days, she'll tell any false statement to attack transgender persons.  Her latest broadcast found her lying some more unless she was gripped by some sort of grand mal delusion.

She cites "a research paper that was recently published to the JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PEDIATRICS."  And there's the visual behind her cottage cheese face -- did her face battle with a weed wacker and lose? -- "Children’s sex-change chest reconstructions up nearly 400% in US: Study" to . . . prove her point?

That's not JAMA PEDIATRICS.  Nor is anything "published to" -- Tulsi was home schooled, remember that.  Not very smart.  Not even smart for her cult.  Periodicals publish -- so it's "published by."

But, again, Tulsi, that's not JAMA PEDIATRICS on the screen behind you.

No, you silly transphobic loon, that's THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER.

And it's not "recently published" -- not the article in THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER nor the JAMA PEDIATRICS article.  

How stupid are you, Tulsi?  I can't imagine being so stupid.  And if you're going to talk about a study, you talk about the study.  You use the primary source.  Not some skewed reading by a right-wing publication.

Smart people -- that doesn't include Tulsi -- catch on to her con.

It's not a research paper (as Tulsi claims) and it's not a "study" (as THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER lies).  It's a letter dubbed "Research Letter" -- one that notes there was no peer review of the letter -- that appears in the letter section -- Das, R., Perdikis, G., Al Kassis, S., & Drolet, B. (2022). Gender-Affirming Chest Reconstruction Among Transgender and Gender-Diverse Adolescents in the US From 2016 to 2019. JAMA Pediatrics, 177(1), 89-90.


She can't even cite correctly.  Did they not do research papers in her home school?   Oh, I see now.  Community college drop out.  Then she went to a private institution and, since hotel management was filled up, she majored in 'business administration.'  Say no more.  Got it.

I don't have the current issue of JAMA PEDIATRICS.  However, the current edition of JAMA (proper) arrived in yesterday's mail.  I need to point this out, you don't even have to open the cover to know what is research and what is a letter.  It's right there on the cover.  "Research"?  Under that it lists papers like "VE303, a Defined Bacterial Consortium, for Prevention of Recurrent Clostridioides difficile Infection: A Randomized Clinical Trial" -- right there on the cover, Tulis.  To the right, "Opinion," to the right "Clinical Review & Education."  Moving to the second half of the cover? 

"Letters" first listed is "Quantity of Melatonin and CBD in Melatonin Gummies Sold in the US."

It seems fairly straightforward to me but then (a) I know how to read, (b) I enjoy reading and (c) I never stupidly thought my education ended when I got my masters.

I read constantly and not just 'fun' stuff.  I think when you're a non-reader and you try, like Tulsi, to do a podcast, you not only embarrass yourself with one mistake after another, you also really don't have anything to say because, while you've been on output for years, you haven't added any input.  You have to refill the well.


At any rate, this is why AOC says FTC and not FCC.  This is fraud.  The FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION protects consumers and that includes from fraud.

It's a two-page letter -- appearing on pages 89 and 90, even Tulsi should be able to grasp that.

She refers to mastectomies which is another give away that Tulsi doesn't actually read.  The two page letter -- maybe someone could read it to her -- and with puppets so she might be able to pay attention? -- explains these are both "masculinizing" chest procedure and "feminizing" chest procedures.

Do you get it?

If not, you may be named Tulsi.  That means that this wasn't all mastectomies.  Feminizing, for instance would be 'feminizing' a chest.  That's additions, not subtractions.  Is that too hard for Tulsi to understand?

It must be because she emphasizes that (wrong) point repeatedly, "I wanna say that again, children receiving mastectomies."

It must really be hard to be both stupid and ugly.  Few could carry it off, Tulsi certainly can't.

She then mangles UCLA's Williams Institute findings.  Your red flag there?  They're not a transphobic institution so if Tulsi's going to cite them, she's going to be dishonest.

She refers to the fact that they "published a study that found the number of transgender youth has doubled in just the past five years.  You got to realize this is not an accident.  This didn't just happen.  This is very intentional, and it's the consequence of this radical agenda that is being pushed on our kids. They're rejecting the existence of objective reality by rejecting this most fundamental truth of the difference between a biological male and female."

Oh, Tulsi, (stealing from a friend), what a treat you must be for all the other gals on your bowling league.

It's a good thing Tulsi doesn't have kids.  If she did, I fear she'd molest them the same way she molests facts.

Before we get to that, can I just point out that 20 years ago, Tulsi's right-wing pals would have told her she was "rejecting the existence of objective reality by rejecting this most fundamental truth of the difference between a biological male and female."  How so?  They would have been talking about her interest in the military and combat and suggesting that she must be a lesbian for those interests.  Sorry, I was at the Congressional hearings where US House Rep John Hall and others had to fight for female service members and veterans to be treated with respect and for it to be recognized that they were operating in a war zone.  

Tulsi's a disgrace.

But back to her stupidity.

This is not an accident, the increase in numbers.  In fact, UCLA's Williams Institute's findings (which have been distorted by the right-wing repeatedly -- I contribute money to UCLA's Williams Institute, disclosure) addressed this.  It's just two paragraphs, Tulsi, I think even you can manage.  You can put your finger on the screen and read along word by word:

This report updates previous Williams Institute estimates of the transgender population released in 2016 and 2017. Results show that the percentage and number of adults who identify as transgender in the U.S. has remained steady over time. With the availability of better data, our estimate of the number of youth who identify as transgender has doubled from our previous estimate.

“Advances in gender identity data collection over the past five years have provided a more accurate picture of youth in the U.S. who identify as transgender. Previously, we could only estimate that based on adult data,” said lead author Jody L. Herman, Senior Scholar of Public Policy at the Williams Institute. “These new estimates show us that current policy debates regarding access to gender-affirming care and the ability to participate in team sports likely impact more youth than we previously thought.”

"Advances in gender identity data collection over the past five years . . ."

Get it, you stupid fool?  

I really am appalled that this fool pretends she reads when she clearly  doesn't read anything.  She's a subliterate fool.  America rightly realized she didn't belong in Congress.  Someone needs to realize that she doesn't belong in front of the camera -- seriously, have they not seen her skin?

She's an idiot.  I know her type and you probably do as well.  She has one fact and a series of half-facts that she's mangled and she uses them to waste the entire class' time -- usually to extoll the 'greatness' of Ayn Rand in a philosophy class focused on Plato's LADDER OF LOVE.  You watch the professor indulge her in one class and only roll your eyes but when it gets to be the fourth class of the semester that she's commandeered not to discuss Plato or respond to his views but to instead promote a hack writer she's enthralled with, you speak up and state that if she can't stay on topic, she needs to be silent.

People believe this idiot.  And she's 'citing' all these things so she must know, right?


She's a fraud, she's a con artist.  She has no education to speak of and that's no one's fault but her own.  You can educate yourself even if you can't afford college.  Yes, I went to college, but I also had a trauma early in life and lost all memory.  I had to reeducate myself.  The good news there, I didn't absorb the bias that many teachers taught as a result.  But I am not the smartest in the room and never claim to be.  If I'm smarter than you, I don't see that as a brag, I see it as a shock.  I enter any gathering with the assumption that I'm the least intelligent and the least informed in the room.  I do not tolerate those who have no curiosity or interest in the world around them.  I don't have time for people like that.  And what makes those Tulsis even sadder is that they don't understand how stupid they are.

We need to touch on the idiot John Stauber now.  Tulsi's doing code in her remarks that some may not pick up on.  It's the Jew, that's what Tulsi's saying, and she means George Soros.  John Stauber promotes the lie that George Soros is creating and multiplying transgender people and that's why he contributes to the Human Rights Campaign.

This nonsense -- by Tulsi and by John -- needs to be called out.

As I have noted, I don't care for George Soros.  I think he has blood money.  By that, I mean he made his money through speculation, profiting off the losses of others. I see that as cruel and I see that as tacky.  I do not want to be associated with him due to how he made his money.  That is nothing new.  As I've noted before, Ava and I were accused of being on George Soros payroll about 20 years ago after a piece we wrote about PBS was posted (by Danny Schechter) without our knowledge to MEDIA CENTER -- which received some money from Soros.  We did not know it had been posted there (our stuff gets posted everywhere -- we're all over the UK's AMAZON in customer reviews) we don't usually know about it until Ty read the sixth or seventh e-mail about it.  We've never said, "Pull it down!" Not to anyone.  But we're not paid for that and we haven't sought payment for that.  The implication that we would profit from someone else's misery made us go public with the issue of Soros.  

We agree with some of his politics and disagree with others.  But that is our problem with him.  Unlike Tulsi and John, we aren't obsessed with him.  And we're not accusing him of attempting to dominate the world or to create a population of transgendered persons nor do we have a problem with him (or anyone) being Jewish.  

The point is that as bad as Tulsi's remarks read, you really have to know the context that her audience is putting them into.  

She only gets more grotesque and outrageous once you grasp how her con feeds into an even larger con taking place.  Hate merchants, you better learn who they are.

The following sites updated: