This could have been an Ethics Dunce, or an Unethical Quote of the Month. It was nearly a KABOOM!, if I hadn’t immediately clasped my hands, hard, over my skull when I read it, just in time to stop my brain from exploding. I also almost included it in draft post called A “This Helps Explain Why Trump Is President” Potpourri.
Upon reflection, I decided that a self-described “civil rights activist” tweeting this was so unethical, so ignorance-promoting, not to mention hateful, bigoted and sexist, that it deserved to stand alone.
An ethical, sane, democracy and American values-supporting “lady” , confronting such a curfew, would realize that a totalitarian regime had taken over, and either join a citizen rebel army, or get the hell out of the country. Yeah, I read the thread, being a “dude,” and realized that what passes for feminism in a lot of cases is misandry and hypocrisy. Also that what passes for a “civil rights activist” is occasionally a crypt-fascist who neither understands civil rights nor supports them.
Imagine if her tweet had substituted “African-Americans” or “Muslims” for “men,” and “dudes”, and “White, law-abiding citizens” for “Ladies.”
If Muscato is to be believed, and frankly, I wouldn’t believe someone who tweets something this stupid to tell me what number comes after “3”, Danielle is often featured in or on the New York Times, Time, CNN, NPR, and Rolling Stone.
What does that tell you?
Perusing this woman’s twitter feed, I also noticed that she responded to a Presidential tweet endorsing a book by suggesting that Trump had breached an ethics rule. “You just made this man millions of dollars!” she bleated-tweeted.
In August, “resistance” ethics hounds were baying at Trump when he tweeted a recommendation for another book, “Cop Under Fire,” by Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke, Jr. “This is only the latest unfortunate example of President Trump disregarding the ethical norms that help ensure that public officials are working for the public rather than for private interests,” Brendan Fischer, an attorney with the Campaign Legal Center, wrote in an email. Other “Only Republican Are Unethical” watchdog groups complained as well, like CREW, the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.
First, there are no ethics rules that prevent a President from saying that he likes a book. I think that Presidents should avoid this, because it can easily get out of hand while sending a message that using government positions to endorse products is not prohibited for everyone else in the Executive Branch except the President and Vice-President, because, in fact, it is.
Second, and this is a smoking gun example of the outrageous media bias against the President, many of his predecessors have endorsed books with nary a peep of protest from anyone, anywhere. Among them, Barack Obama, who happily endorsed movies, books and helped get movies made out of books he endorsed, like Doris Kearns Goodwin’s “Team of Rivals,” which Stephen Spielberg turned into “Lincoln,” making Goodwin, an old professor of mine, “millions of dollars.”
But that was Obama, you see, who could do no wrong. Trump can do no right, even when he does exactly the same thing. If Obama was criticized by the news media for conduct identical to what other Presidents had done with impunity, what would that be called? The word is prejudice. That’s exactly what this treatment of Trump is now.
And thinking, writing and opining based on prejudice is how a “civil rights activist” who admires gender-based discrimination gets to appear in or on NYT, Time, CNN, NPR, Rolling Stone, without someone like me nearby to explain why she’s a phony.