Good morning from Richmond, Va.!
1 Passengers keep piling onto the Harvey Weinstein Ethics Train Wreck:
- Fashion designer Donna Karan, questioned about Weinstein at an event, said in part:
“I also think how do we display ourselves? How do we present ourselves as women,” Karan said to the Daily Mail. “What are we asking? Are we asking for it by presenting all the sensuality and all the sexuality?”
Then she pointed to Weinstein’s achievements, and said Weinstein and his wife were “wonderful people.”
(Note to the designer: men who use their power to harass and assault women are not wonderful people by definition.)
After the predictable response to these idiotic comments, Karan protested that her quote was taken out of context, as if the context wasn’t Harvey Weinstein, and issued a low level apology that could only mean, “I’m deeply sorry I said something in public that reveals the miserable level of my values.”
- Lindsay Lohan, currently in exile in Great Britain and Dubai, used social media to remind her fans in the US that she is, after all, a moron, writing on Instagram,
“I feel very bad for Harvey Weinstein right now. I don’t think it’s right what’s going on….He’s never harmed me or did anything to me – we’ve done several movies together.I think everyone needs to stop – I think it’s wrong. So stand up.”
One of the real benefits of social media is that it reveals the total lack of ethics comprehension, reasoning ability and life competence that inflict so much of the public, including celebrities. With clarity of thought like that, is there any mystery regarding how the once rising star managed to mangle her career despite beauty, talent, and early success?
- NBC was presented with the Weinstein story before it was broken by the New York Times, says Ronan Farrow, the author of a new Weinstein investigative piece in The New Yorker. The network hasn’t said why. Does it have to? Weinstein was close to both the Clintons and the Obamas, and the scandal directly implicates the Democratic party and its core supporters….like NBC. It is fascinating to watch cable and network anchors and guests desperately try to analogize Weinstein to President Trump, but the Hollywood mogul was enabled by self-righteous liberals and was given the King’s Pass (with an assist from the Saint’s Excuse) because he gave to Planned Parenthood and Hillary, making him, in Donna Karan’s words, “wonderful” by definition. The analogy is Bill Clinton, of course, and any journalist who refuses to acknowledge that has confessed crippling partisan bias.
2. This brings us to a quote by blogger Ann Althouse:
“My hypothesis is that liberals — including nearly everyone in the entertainment business — suppressed concern about sexual harassment to help Bill Clinton. Giving him cover gave cover to other powerful men, and the cause of women’s equality in the workplace was set back 20 years.”
Her hypothesis is correct, and I said so when the liberals, feminists, abortion zealots, artistic community and others circled their wagons around Clinton during the Lewinsky scandal. This is one reason why Hillary’s campaign stance as standard-bearer for women’s rights and victims of sexual assault was so grotesque.
Here’s another quote from Althouse that I like:
“Who are the women who accepted the deal as offered by Harvey Weinstein? Will their names be kept out of the press? Should they?…
…So much silence facilitating so much harm! Should the women who took the bargain and got what they wanted out of it be regarded as victims and entitled to keep their names secret, or are they part of a system that hurt many others, and subject to outing.”
4. Yesterday, Nancy Pelosi said that providing a ticket to citizenship for “Dreamers,” as in illegal immigrants brought here as children whose successful breaching of US laws to their benefit will create a strong incentive for foreign parents to sneak into the country, is so important to her party that it will consider provoking a government shutdown rather than compromise on the issue. Think about the priorities that statement suggests.
5. Political correctness combined with religious fanaticism and contrived offense will kill Halloween within the decade. The latest example: people are outraged over this costume for an adult:
Let me explain, or rather, let this article try to explain:
The $50 costume — like other unauthorized costumes — does not officially use “Stranger Things” [the Netflix horror series that rips off about 10 Stephen King books and almost as many Spielberg movies] in the title, but the likeness to Eleven, played by 13-year-old Millie Bobby Brown, is indisputable. Brown, as Eleven, appeared on the Netflix series wearing a blonde wig, a pink dress with a high collar, and a jacket. The character also had a fondness for frozen waffles. The costume, called the Upside Down Honey — a reference to the show’s alternate “Upside Down” universe — consists of a blonde wig, a pink dress, a jacket and a waffle-shaped purse.
The model in the costume also suffered from Eleven’s same affliction: a bloody nose….
Though sexualized costumes at Halloween are not new, fans have particular issue with this one because the character in the show is not even a teenager yet.
It’s a costume. The offense is dressing like a post-puberty version of pre-pubescent fictional character? What is that offense, exactly? If there isn’t an existing political correctness violation, then they’ll just make a new one up.
6. The things desperate lawyers say: Ethics Alarms has repeatedly explained that the duty of zealous representation requires lawyers to take some nauseating positions, but I’m beginning to think that there need to be limits. Lawyers have managed to tie up a law suit against the Palm Beach County school system—over a male teacher who molested four third grade girls— for 12 years. Nothing wrong with that; now the County has finally agreed to a settlement. However, during its defense, the County allowed its lawyers to argue that the third-graders were “old enough to appreciate the consequences of their actions” when they did what their teacher told them to do.”
If a school makes that despicable a defense, it should 1) forfeit the case and 2) be razed, with salt sown into the ground where it stood.