1. From sources within Google management, we learn that the firing of the diversity memo writer, James Demore, was hotly debated, but in the end...
“…Damore’s focus on biology really made it clear that he had crossed the line.” What turned the tide, said sources, was when it was noted that if Damore’s dubious contentions about women’s skills were replaced by those about race or religion, there would be no debate.’
Ethics diagnosis: Bias made them stupid…that is, Google’s political correctness bias. If someone says that blacks, for example, are biologically handicapped for certain jobs, that’s bigotry and ignorance, the equivalent of poor Al Campanis’s infamous statement to Ted Koppel that blacks “lacked the necessities ” to manage a baseball team. If someone says that holding religious beliefs suggests one may have biological disadvantages, then that individual is, of course, an idiot.
Women, however, are biologically different from men. If this was the reasoning behind Demore’s dismissal, then it is an example of regarding fealty to cant and politically correct mythology as more important than dealing with complex realities.
2. Professional Trump apologist Jeffrey Lord reacted with a tweeted Sieg Heil! to Left Wing attack group Media Matters organizing a boycott of the Fox News star’s sponsors to force Sean Hannity off the air. CNN responded by firing Lord, saying, “Nazi salutes are indefensible.”
Except that Lord was not performing a Nazi salute, but alluding to it to make the very accurate point that the Media Matters wing of progressive America is anti-free speech, and, Nazi-like, determined to shut down inconvenient dissent. Sieg Heil!, in the context of Lord’s tweet, did not mean “Yay Hitler, and let’s kill some Jews!” but rather “Media Matters embodies fascism of the left.”
Which it does.
This story is just full of detestable people and organizations. Jeffrey Lord is a dishonest hack whom CNN keeps parading before its viewers to pretend that the network is “balanced” in its relentless critical commentary on the President. Typically Lord is the sole defender of the Administration on a panel of multiple virulent critics, presided over by one of CNN’s myriad anti-Trump hosts. Sean Hannity is a knee-jerk conservative without scruples, perception or shame. Media Matters is a left-wing propaganda machine that makes a mockery of the term “media watchdog” by its very existence, and it is not unfair to rate its creator and leader, David Brock, as unstable. And I don’t like Nazi salutes either, though to call them “indefensible” is just plain wrong. They are defensible on the History Channel, to show how Nazis behaved. They are defensible in films like “Valkyrie,” since Tom Cruise’s doomed hero’s reluctant salute was a central theme.
It is defensible in Mel Brooks movies, which feature the salute frequently, to mock the Nazis. It is defensible in “Dr. Strangelove,” to make the running joke that mysterious ex-Nazi genius has a Nazi arm with mind of its own.
And it is defensible to use the Nazi salute derisively to say,”David Brock and Media Matters are fascist in the their methods and attitudes towards free speech.”
CNN’s firing of Lord falsely implied that he was referencing the salute positively. By doing this, the increasingly unprofessional and untrustworthy network was also able to impugn President Trump; after all, if his most visible defender in a Nazi, that makes the President Hitler, right?
In this particular basket of deplorables, CNN may be the most unethical of all.
3. Remember the smug, virtue-signaling theater that held a women-only screening of “Wonder Woman”?
This was, Ethics Alarms held, obviously unethical discrimination and a double standard, as well as illegal under public accommodations laws. I challenged our resident social justice warriors to condemn this stunt (or have the guts to defend it), but in general they ducked the question, except for the prominent commenter here who wrote, “Based on what I know of Wonder Woman’s creator, William Moulton Marston, I think he’d be more than fine with an all-woman showing of the film.”
This was as pure an example of Rationalization 32A. Imaginary Consent, “He/She Would Have Wanted It This Way” as well as #42. The Hillary Inoculation, or “If he/she doesn’t care, why should anyone else?” as you are likely to see.
Now the chain has apologized for the screenings in a letter to the city. Drafthouse Cinema, which was sued for gender discrimination, admitted their film screening for women was in violation of the anti-discrimination laws in Austin, Texas. The apology left something to be desired:
“Respondent did not realize that advertising a ‘women’s-only’ screening was a violation of discrimination laws,” the theater wrote to the city. “Respondent has a very strict non-discrimination policy in place, but this policy did NOT include a specific prohibition against advertising.”
That something is called “honesty.” The discrimination involved wasn’t the advertising, but the conduct: the theater withheld its services based on gender. Moreover, “we didn’t know it was illegal” is never a legitimate defense.
Also revolting is the tone in which Salon reported the story, alluding to men “whining” about the exclusion. Got it: when women fight for equal treatment, it’s heroic; when men protest a double standard, they are “whining.”
4. Debbie Wasserman Schultz has been unavailable to the news media, refusing to explain why she continued to employ Imran Awan, an IT staffer who was under a federal investigation for an alleged equipment and data scam in the U.S. House of Representative. She finally fired the Pakistan scamster on July 25, six months after learning that he was not to be trusted, and one day after authorities arrested him at the airport trying to feel Pakistan after wiring $283,000 there.
She finally issued a written statement on the controversy, and it is about what I would have expected from her: shameless, brazen, and dishonest.
“As a mother, a Jew, and a Member of Congress, if there is one thing I know for sure, it’s this: my commitment to doing what’s right and just — even if it isn’t what’s easy and simple — is unyielding.Undoubtedly, the easier path would have been to terminate Mr. Awan, despite the fact that I had not received any evidence of his alleged wrongdoing. Over time, the investigation raised troubling concerns for me about fair treatment, due process, and potential ethnic and religious profiling.”
- How many victim and sympathy cards can a single politician play at one? There must be a rule somewhere. What does being a mother and a Jew have to do with allowing a shady character to have access to her party members e-mail accounts and communications?
- What evidence is there that this epically corrupt political hack has ever cared about doing what was “right and just”?
- Is she really saying that she believes it was more important to make a foolish grandstanding gesture against imagined anti-Muslim bias than to prevent a suspected criminal to have access to her party’s elected officials’ communications? It sure sounds like it. First, that excuse is unbelievable. Second, if you believe it, then you must also acknowledge that she is too stupid to function in society, much less to be the head of the Democratic National Committee.
- For those who are still, somehow, wailing to the skies, “How, oh how, could Hillary Clinton have lost to Donald Trump??”, they really need to focus on the fact that Hillary appointed this ridiculous,shady, inept and dishonest woman to a campaign position immediately after she was forced to resign in the wake of evidence that she presided over a DNC staff that was rigging the nomination against Clinton’s opponent, Senator Sanders.