Ethics Dunce: Ann Althouse

I like Ann and admire her, as readers here know. She’s quirky and smart; she’s either political moderate or apolitical; she tries very hard to stay objective; she’s an iconoclast and a contrarian, and best of all, she agrees with me about 75% of the time. Thus it pains me no end to designate her an Ethics Dunce, but I have no choice. She posted this:

“New Clinton Memoir: ‘We All Made Mistakes But You Made Most Of Them.'”

“‘I’m not suggesting it’s entirely your fault, but, let’s be frank, 99 percent of it is,’ read one passage from the chapter entitled ‘Seriously, What Were You Thinking?’ in which the former candidate conceded missteps she had made over the course of her campaign while also clarifying that none of them should have produced the final election outcome, which she characterized as ‘squarely on you fucking people.'”
It’s fake news. It’s from “The Onion,” and while that may seem obvious to some, the fact that Ann Althouse’s blog is not a satire, or fake news site means that this unmarked  gag post once removed is a lie.I have been seeing this with more frequency of late—among other, Glenn Reynolds has posted fake stories on Instapundit, assuming that readers will immediately get the joke with him having to flag it. Or maybe he was fooled: the point is that there is no way to be sure. The Althouse post above, coming on the heels of the Clinton excerpt from the book of yesterday, seemed just a step or two farther along on The Road to Lunacy. I believed it might be true, which is the only reason I clicked on the link. As I learn from commenters here every day, most people do not click on links.  Many people will repeat as fact to a third party what they read in a headline without reading the rest.

This  headline is New Clinton Memoir: “We All Made Mistakes But You Made Most Of Them.” Is that really so inherently hilarious and nonsensical that Althouse can be certain no readers with a functioning brain will believe it? Is it harder to believe she would write this in her book than say, during last year’s campaign, “I was surprised that he used personal email account if he is at State.”? Or remember when Hillary was asked about the stunned responses of viewers when she said, in her first debate with Bernie Sanders, that the reason she was getting getting millions in widespread Wall Street firm support, that “So, I represented New York, and I represented New York on 9/11 when we were attacked. Where were we attacked? We were attacked in downtown Manhattan where Wall Street is. I did spend a whole lot of time and effort helping them rebuild. That was good for New York. It was good for the economy and it was a way to rebuke the terrorists who had attacked our country.” ?

During that same  debate,  CBS passed a tweet along from a fellow head-explodee.. “And Secretary Clinton, one of the tweets we saw said this,” said CBS’s tweet-mistress Nancy Cordes. “I’ve never seen a candidate invoke 9/11 to justify millions of Wall Street donations until now.” The idea being, yes, you were a champion of the community after 9/11, but what does that have to do with taking big donations?”

Hillary answered—“Well, I’m sorry that whoever tweeted that had that impression.” HAD THAT IMPRESSION??? That’s what she had literally just said! How hard is to believe that a woman who would claim, on live, coast-to-caost TV,  that a voter is mistaken to interpret as what she just said as what she just said, wouldn’t also write in her post-election  botch memoir that We all made mistakes but you made most of them”?

Then there was the time—several times, actually—that the wife of the man who was repeatedly accused of sexual assault by women who she subsequently worked to discredit stated, “Every survivor of sexual assault deserves to be heard, believed, and supported.” That she would say this is more ridiculous than anything in the Onion piece, including

“Indeed, fake news and Russian meddling played a part, and I’ve acknowledged I wasn’t the perfect candidate, but let’s not lose sight of the fact that the majority of the blame—all but the tiniest sliver—lies with you, the idiot voters. You really blew it, dumbasses. Bravo!” 

I love ya, Ann, but where the delusions of Hillary Clinton are concerned, like the tweets of President Trump, the things professors at major institutions of higher learning say,  and the complete abdication of competence, objectivity and professionalism by the news media, satire is impossible because hyperbole is impossible. Virtually anything is believable: that’s why fake news is so effective, and hoax news is so insidious. We’re supposed to able to believe what we read on your website.

Cut it the hell out.



13 thoughts on “Ethics Dunce: Ann Althouse

    • See, I learned something today. Actually several somethings:

      Duck when a hurricane is immanent;
      Morons can be stampeded into panic buying in non threatened areas;
      Poe’s law

      Stay safe and dry, Dragon, TexAg, and my other Texas peeps!

  1. Won’t the liberals and Democrats ever get tired of Hillary and her multiple accusations and excuses — for being a lousy candidate, a dishonest person, and unworthy to be President of the United States? I guess not, but it’s not only getting old but now ridiculous. Anyone who takes her seriously has definitely lost significant IQ points with their head-exploding rants and raves about how wonderful she really was. (Does anyone really believe it? Would we be hearing any of this deifying of Hillary if anyone, anyone, other than Trump had won?)

  2. I suppose that Althouse would say that including the last portion with the curse word in it revealed it as obvious satire. Clinton might well think such things, but would pass a book through ten layers of vetting to remove any content that might be interesting to anyone. For me, the tip off would be that the link was to a print version, instead of to Clinton muttering and cursing aloud.

    Which raises the question: how much would someone have to pay you to listen to Hillary Clinton read a book about herself?

  3. Yet, if Trump said any of these quotes, you would say: “Yes, yes. We all know that Trump is not careful with words. Stop dissecting his words.” Double standard.

  4. Sure the article regarding the Clinton memoir looked like it might be a spoof but I didn’t click the link to be sure. I tend to trust Ann. Not long before this, she posted the item where Hillary talked about how her skin crawled because Trump was breathing down her neck during a debate so the more recent one didn’t sound totally unbelievable as something Hillary might say. I checked your link to the professor who is calling all members of the GOP racists. On that same page is a link to a law professor who is warning congress that it must act on the growing sexbot industry. I don’t know why. I’m afraid to look. I don’t want to learn that my wife may have been replaced by a sexbot. I learned from Ann that the Boy Scouts have been accused by the Girl Scouts of secretly trying to recruit girls. I take that to mean cisgirls and not transboys. I don’t know what their policy is on transboys or transgirls or sexbots for that matter. And for a final dose of insanity, CBS reports that Mayor de Blasio is going to head a commission to consider whether or not to pull down the monuments to Columbus and the well known anti-Semite U. S. Grant among others such as Dr. J. Marion Sims. Fortunately I don’t suffer from head kabooms (skull too thick) but I do feel that my brain is about to catch fire, so time to go stick my head in a bucket of ice water, again.

  5. You said, “We’re supposed to able to believe what we read on your website.”
    Does that mean I must believe everything you write, even if it’s antithetical to what I believe?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.