There’s Hurricane Hysteria in the Washington area, with everyone freaking out and clearing the store shelves, and the news media making it sound like this is the End of Days. Did you know that BOTH Chicken Little and the Boy Who Cried Wolf lived in Washington, D.C.? Thanks to a late summer repeat of what goes on every time there’s a rumor of nascent snow flake during our winters, nobody’s working, returning emails and phone calls, or doing anything, it seems, except, I assume, trying to figure out a way to blame whatever happens on President Trump.
Incidentally, this was going to be an afternoon post yesterday, until my car blew a radiator hose on Route 395 at rush hour.
1. Yes, more on the “racist cartoon.” Reader Michael B. reminded me of some of the liberal editorial cartoonists’ attacks on Condoleeza Rice. Here was one such cartoon, from 2005, that I found online.
Here’s the real Condoleeza:
I’ve been challenged to post a poll on this cartoon too, but that’s tricky. The two cartoons are not equivalent. I don’t think either is racist, but if I were in the business of race-baiting, the Rice cartoon is worse for several reasons. To begin with, Serena really did throw a tantrum on the U.S. Open court, and it was ugly, thus theoretically justifying an ugly graphic portrayal. There was never an incident analogous to what the cartoon Condi is shown doing. Moreover, she never exhibited anything approaching the snarling, aggressive demeanor portrayed by the cartoonist, at least not in public. I think the face given Rice is also vaguely simian, and if a similar spoof of Michell Obama had been published, all hell would have broken loose.
There were some complaints about racist caricatures of Rice during the Bush years, but all from conservative organizations and commentators, none from the NAACP, and nothing on the scale of the uproar over the Williams cartoon.
My position is…
….that both the Williams and the Rice cartoon are within the acceptable range of an art form I detest and find inherently unethical, editorial cartooning.
….that the indignation over either cartoon is driven by bias toward the targets.
….that anyone who wasn’t vocal about “racial insensitivity” toward Rice in various cartoons is not the most convincing advocate for the position that the Knight drawing is racist. Yes, such a person might have changed their point of view, but he or she has the burden of proof to demonstrate that this is the case. I’m skeptical.
So here are TWO polls..
2. I find it difficult to believe that as Democrats are revealing the total ethical void in their current strategy, polls show voters favoring a Democratic Congress in the upcoming election. Of course, it helps that the mainstream news media won’t communicate to the public fairly so they understand what’s going on:
- During his hearings, Bret Kavanaugh said, speaking of the position of the plaintiffs in a case, “In that case, they said filling out the form would make them complicit in the provision of the abortion-inducing drugs that were, as a religious matter, objected to.” This was immediately distorted in the news media and by anti-Kavanaugh activists as Kavanaugh referring to birth control as “abortion-inducing drugs.” Hillary Clinton (to be fair, I assume that she was reading second hand accounts—you know, like everyone criticizes Trump for doing with Fox News) then beclowned herself by tweeting:
I want to be sure we’re all clear about something that Brett Kavanaugh said in his confirmation hearings last week. He referred to birth-control pills as “abortion-inducing drugs.” That set off a lot of alarm bells for me, and it should for you, too.
[Pointer: Zoltar Speaks!]
- CNN tweeted this (Pointer: Instapundit):
I think this qualifies as going beyond deceit to pure lying. The texts themselves were evidence. It’s like a defense attorney saying “The prosecution, without evidence, suggests that the murder weapon with the defendant’s fingerprints on it links him to the killing!”
- A man cursing Donald Trump attempted to stab Republican Rudy Peters, running for the House in California, with a switchblade over the weekend.This kind of thing does not happen every day, nor in every Congressional race. Democrats have increasingly been suggesting violent measures be used against conservatives and Republicans, and there has already been one armed attack that nearly killed Rep. Steve Scalise and threatened other GOP officials. Yet when Rep. Eric Swalwell, Peters’ opponent, appeared on CNN host Erin Burnett’s show “Erin Burnett Outfront” last night, she never asked Stalwell about the attack or its implications. That’s journalistic negligence, and likely bias.
3. Please explain this to me. Anyone? Karen White, a transgender man “transitioning” to female, was accused of repeatedly raping a woman in 2016 and had been previously been jailed in 2001 for a sexual assault on a child. After telling the authorities that he identified as a woman, Karen, who still has her penis, aka her weapon of choice when engaged in sexual assault, was remanded into HMP New Hall near Wakefield, West Yorkshire, an all female facility.
She then sexually assaulted four female inmates a few days later. Who could have predicted such a thing? The prison’s spokesperson said: “We apologize sincerely for the mistakes which were made in this case. While we work to manage all prisoners, including those who are transgender, sensitively and in line with the law, we are clear that the safety of all prisoners must be our absolute priority.”
Huh? If they are “clear” on that, then why was an accused rapist placed in what must have seemed like a smorgasbord to him. I’m sorry, her. Wait, does employing one’s wanker to assault women just like in those per-transitioning days cancel one’s right to identify as female?
Oh, the hell with it: The distinction, in prisons, dressing rooms, athletic teams and bathrooms should be penises or no penises. It may not be perfect, but its better than whatever the current progressive system is now.
4. Now explain THIS, back in the states:Wanda Barzee, 72, is going to be freed from prison more than five years earlier than expected, despite having been convicted of helping her husband, Brian David Mitchell, kidnap 14-year-old Elizabeth Smart from her Salt Lake City bedroom at knife-point in 2002. Over the next nine months, Barzee and Mitchell forced Smart to “marry” Mitchell, she was made a virtual slave by the couple, denied food and water for days at a time, and raped almost daily. Smart, now married and an advocate for victims of sexual assault, called the decision “incomprehensible” on Tuesday.
Yes, I’d agree that less than life imprisonment for aiding and abetting a series of crimes like that is incomprehensible. It’s not as if Barzee has been a model prisoner. She refused to appear at her parole hearing. She is also suffering from multiple mental problems.
The technical explanation is that when she was transferred from a federal to a state prison, Barzee’s motion to have the 8 years she already served count toward her Utah sentence. The motion was rejected, and apparently that was a legal error. What I don’t comprehend is the logic of letting the partner, accomplice and willing facilitator of the horrible crimes that put her husband away for life get away with a lesser sentence in the first place.
5. The soft censorship continues…Former Saturday Night Live news anchor Norm Macdonald had his appearance on “The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon” canceled this week after the comedian’s comments in an interview were deemed too hostile to current #MeToo cant.
In an interview with Hollywood Reporter, Macdonald had said he was “happy the #MeToo movement has slowed down a little bit.” “It used to be, ‘One hundred women can’t be lying.’ And then it became, ‘One woman can’t lie.’ And that became, ‘I believe all women.’ And then you’re like, ‘What?’ Like, that Chris Hardwick guy I really thought got the blunt end of the stick there.” Macdonald suggested there was a lack of “forgiveness” for entertainers who were accused of unacceptable words or conduct, with Louis C.K. and Roseanne Barr as examples. “Now it’s admit wrongdoing and you’re finished. And so the only way to survive is to deny, deny, deny. That’s not healthy,” he said. “I do think that at some point it will end with a completely innocent person of prominence sticking a gun in his head and ending it…There are very few people that have gone through what they have, losing everything in a day. Of course, people will go, ‘What about the victims?’ But you know what? The victims didn’t have to go through that.”
“Out of sensitivity to our audience and in light of Norm Macdonald’s comments in the press today, ‘The Tonight Show’ has decided to cancel his appearance on Tuesday’s telecast,” NBC said in a statement.
Let me quickly give the ethics verdicts on what Macdonald said, beginning with, “It’s a legitimate set of political, professional and social opinions.”
- There is nothing wrong with being pleased that #MeToo may have completed its witch hunt phase, with mere accusations wrecking careers with little differentiation between actual sexual harassment and momentary bad judgment.
- The “All women have a right to be believed” was utter nonsense from the beginning, and Mcdonald’s characterization was fair.
- Forgiveness is an ethical value. Are Tonight Show viewers really going to be horrified at the suggestion that society should be more willing to forgive?
- It is correct that a culture in which denying the truth works better than admitting wrongdoing isn’t healthy.
- Even if a not completely innocent person of prominence kills himself over the intensity of social vengeance and media hounding he has experienced, it is a sign of that fanaticism has overtaken fairness and proportion. With some of the individuals—Kevin Spacey comes to mind—it appears that people want to push him over the edge.
- Yes, his comparison of the victims to the perpetrators could have been phrased better, and sounded callous.
To his discredit, Mcdonald, as is the trend, immediately groveled for forgiveness with a non-apology apology, tweeting,
“Roseanne and Louis have both been very good friends of mine for many years. They both made terrible mistakes and I would never defend their actions. If my words sounded like I was minimizing the pain that their victims feel to this day, I am deeply sorry.”
If Mcdonald’s position is that Roseanne had “victims,” then he has assented to the anti-speech Hollywood proto-fascism that the Tonight Show dissplayed by dumping him. Roseanne sent a racist tweet that consisted of offensive words. She had no “victims.”