Morning Ethics Warm-Up, 9/20/2018: Trying To Get All Of The Brett Kavanaugh Nomination Ethics Train Wreck—Or Is It The Harvey Weinstein Ethics Train Wreck?— Debris Cleared So I Can Write About Something Else [UPDATED]

Good Morning!

[Actually, it’s late at night. Somehow today’s original warm-up vanished; not sure how. It’s back now. Sorry for whatever it was...and my apologies for the confusion. Luckily, the comments were preserved.]

1. #MeToo, ethics corrupter. The Kavanaugh hearing fiasco shows that #MeToo, like Black Lives Matter, has become an ethics corrupter. It has handed women the power to destroy men without fairness, proportion or due process, and because power does, in fact, corrupt, the results have been predictable. Since it involves tribal divisions and victim-mongering, Democrats have benefited from the movement, while acceding to making misandry fashionable and acceptable, just as the party embraced Black Lives Matter with its promotion of anti-white racism and the vilification of police.

Once #MeToo started being about partisan political gain rather than recognizing the serious problem of sexual harassment and abuse in the workplace and elsewhere, it compromised its objectives and eroded its credibility. If Brett Kavanaugh’s accuser refuses to appear before the Judiciary Committee, her motives and those of her supporters will be in plain sight.

They should be anyway. Were it not for the news media’s near complete abdication of its duty to inform the public without regard for how facts will affect elections, Democrats would already be thoroughly exposed as hypocrites. How in the world can leaders of the Democratic Party demand a futile FBI investigation of a 30-year-old incident at a high school party while the party’s own co-chair, Keith Ellison, has been credibly accused of domestic abuse, a current, provable crime that #MeToo cares about, and he has not been suspended, investigated, or even widely criticized?

#MeToo power is also being used to censor dissent. Ian Buruma, the editor of the New York Times Review of Books has been forced to resign because he approved an essay by a #MeToo-targeted journalist who was eventually acquitted in court. His essay described how public accusations alone, without verification or confirmation, are enough to destroy a mans’s life and livelihood. “There has indeed been enough humiliation for a lifetime,” the author, Jian Ghomeshi wrote. “I cannot just move to another town and reboot with a pseudonym. I’m constantly competing with a villainous version of myself online. This is the power of a contemporary mass shaming.” The #MeToo social media mob was so outraged that it drove Burama to resign.

And he was so good at making sure almost every book review included some Trump-bashing, too!

2. Over at “The View,” that lamentable daytime TV monster created by Barbara Walters that offers left-wing talking points dripping from the maws of has-been comics, Joy Behar, the nastiest of the crew since Rosie O’Donnell left,  said of the Senate Judiciary Committee, “These white men, old by the way, are not protecting women… They’re protecting a man who is probably guilty.” On what basis is Behar able to assert that Kavanaugh is “probably guilty”? That’s the presumption of #MeToo, of course. All men are abusers and harassers, and every accusation by a woman is fair and true. Yes, yes, women sometimes accuse men of rape falsely for various reasons, but never harassment or sexual assault. Note also how #MeToo advocacy also provides a green light for anti-white bigotry and ageism on national TV in a den of progressives.

Nice.

Do Democrats really think that the way to a “blue wave” is to demonize half the population based on their chromosomes? Wasn’t that Hillary’s strategy? Apparently that is still the plan. Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), told CNN,

 “[W]hat really bothers me and gets me so angry is the White House is victimizing [Ford]. … Guess who’s perpetuating all these kinds of actions? It’s the men in this country. I just want to say to the men of this country — just shut up and step up. Do the right thing for a change.”

You know, the right thing: condemning a man and distinguished judge for an alleged, unsubstantiated incident while he was in high school that conveniently surfaced in a desperate effort to stop conservatives from having a majority on the Supreme Court.

3. Speaking of hypocrisy: Hillary Clinton  Althouse has an almost unreadable post up about Hillary Clinton’s pontifications about Brett Kavanaugh. Fortunately Ann’s headline is enough: “Hillary, I will accept your good faith on this subject if you will do just one thing first: Denounce your husband.”

The retired law professor refers to the video below and says, “I cannot watch the video without screaming at the screen.” I will add to that reaction, which I share, is that any woman who does not feel similarly has had her values rotted away.

4. Let’s not forget Senator Feinstein…I could not do better than Chicago Tribune columnist John Kass’s condemnation of Feinstein’s ethics, which begins:

“Decency was once an important feature of the Democratic Party’s story. Long before Bork became a verb, long before Clarence Thomas was dragged through the mud because a conservative black man proved a profound threat to Democrats, the party held fast to the notion of decency. A lack of decency was something to be feared, something to be avoided for the health of the country. You’d hear about it in tales told by history teachers to frighten children, about Republican Sen. Joe McCarthy and his wild, unsubstantiated charges without evidence, of communists hiding under America’s beds. Such charges ruined reputations and careers, and took advantage of public opinion that had been whipped up during those Red Scare days.

Many have forgotten those days ever existed. But I remember liberal and conservative professors (there were still conservative professors then), talking about McCarthy and what a danger his demagogic recklessness posed to the republic.

And so, I ask again, Sen. Feinstein: Have you no decency?”

Why bother asking? Clearly she doesn’t. Her conduct was signature significance: a fair and decent Senator doesn’t do what President Trump accurately described (for a change):

[T]his should have been brought up long ago and that’s what you have hearings for, you don’t wait until the hearing is over and then all of a sudden bring it up. When Senator Feinstein sat with Judge Kavanaugh for a long period of time, a long, long meeting. She had this letter, why didn’t she bring it up? Why didn’t she bring it up then? Why didn’t the Democrats bring it up then? … Again, they knew what they were doing. They should have done this a long time ago, three months ago, not now. But they did it now.

Senator Feinstein isn’t the only one without decency. Anyone who supports her unethical tactics has no decency either.

31 Comments

Filed under Character, Ethics Train Wrecks, Gender and Sex, Government & Politics, Journalism & Media

31 responses to “Morning Ethics Warm-Up, 9/20/2018: Trying To Get All Of The Brett Kavanaugh Nomination Ethics Train Wreck—Or Is It The Harvey Weinstein Ethics Train Wreck?— Debris Cleared So I Can Write About Something Else [UPDATED]

  1. Didn’t the Greeks have a solution for politicians like that?

  2. Jack,
    There is something weird going on with the fonts and text sizes in this blog post.

  3. Do Democrats really think that the way to a “blue wave” is to demonize half the population based on their chromosomes?

    Sadly, too many of them say yes.

    Democrats have benefited from the movement, while acceding to making misandry fashionable and acceptable, just as the party embraced Black Lives Matter with its promotion of anti-white racism and the vilification of police.

    I wonder how many men would respond to misandry with misogyny.

    • Hide and watch.

      Why hire a woman who can destroy you on her way up the corporate ladder, on a whim, years after she works for you?

      This is what the progressive are driving at, without seeing the real results as I describe.

      This will be known as misogyny, as the progressive warp the language.

  4. Three questions Senator Feinstein seems to have no interest in addressing:

    *Did/is/will she speak up for Juanita Broaddrick?

    *Did/is/will she speak up for former Keith Ellison girlfriend Karen Monahan?

    *What’s up with those Harvey Weinstein donations?

  5. Michael R.

    You are forgetting, Keith Ellison can’t be touched. He is running for attorney general of Minnesota and only holds a slim lead over his Republican opponent. There is massive welfare fraud currently in Minnesota. Possibly half the funding to their Child Care Assistance program had been defrauded with some reports stating the money being delivered to al Shabab and other terrorist groups. The state has found 13 such fraud rings, each one run by Muslim refugees. They have 10 to dozens more in their sights. The speculation is that this is tied to refugees on welfare traveling to terrorist-controlled regions of Africa while carrying tens of thousands to millions of dollars each time (declared money). The Democratic government has resisted investigating this further. They claim this is just how the completely unregulated Muslim banking system in this country works and their is nothing to worry about if the Muslim refugee community is sending $100 million a year into terrorist controlled areas from Minnesota.

    If Keith Ellison is investigated, a Republican may become attorney general. If a Republican becomes attorney general, he may investigate this fraud more closely. Therefore, Keith Ellison can’t be investigated.

    http://www.fox9.com/news/investigators/millions-of-dollars-in-suitcases-fly-out-of-msp-but-why

    http://www.fox9.com/news/investigators/millions-of-dollars-in-suitcases-fly-out-of-msp-but-why

    https://www.minnpost.com/new-americans/2018/05/what-you-need-know-about-somali-money-transfers-and-mysterious-bags-full-cash/

  6. Edward

    The Democrats have no decency:

    We have to set an example for the rest of the nation that we will not dismiss a survivor’s claims, and we will not whitewash and sweep under the rug a victim of sexual misconduct just for the convenience of a timetable. pic.twitter.com/9qiurPuOmU

    — Senate Democrats (@SenateDems) September 19, 2018

  7. Kyjo

    Another proof of media bias:

    “Trump claims, without evidence …” has become a trope in various headlines and stories. Have we seen, “Christine Blasey Ford claims, without evidence …”?

  8. 1. I pray to God that Americans are paying attention, and the Blue Wave is a sniffle.

    2. Hell, I was voting against this woman when I voted for Trump. I knew she had no shame, ethics, morals, principles, or a truthful bone in her body.

    3. Can we prosecute DiFi for transmitting false evidence to the FBI. Withholding evidence? Double parking? (just kidding)

    She is so bad she made TRUMP accurately describe something in clear, well written, logical sentences. I was really beginning to believe he could not do that.

    Extra on 1. Holy crap, Jake. That posting about False Rape accusers is a doozy. That WAS the wild west! Quote “If I thought we could get away with it, I would recommend the use of gibbets” “you cretinous buffoon” and my favorite, “You’re a special kind of moron, aren’t you?”

    The comments are fascinating! Maybe we should get a weekly ‘golden oldies’ post and let you take the break on day a week.

    • Glenn Logan

      Extra on 1. Holy crap, Jake. That posting about False Rape accusers is a doozy. That WAS the wild west!

      Well, the Duke lacross scandal, and the UVA mattress lady scandal were all “survivors” of sexual abuse. They’ve also all gone down the memory hole.

  9. Why is she even remotely being allowed to dictate terms to the JC? I just read where she wants safety assurances. I assume tomorrow it will be a new beach house in Hawaii. When my anti-Trump spouse – the lovely Cynthia – goes on a rant over how idiotic Ms. Ford behaves I realize there is a faint glimmer of sanity.

    • Glenn Logan

      Until she agrees to testify, I have to think that this is just a tactic to delay the committee vote. She’ll say she will come next Friday, then at the last minute, will not be able to do so, citing some nebulous saftey concern, illness, or [insert reason here].

      Grassley will say it’s time to vote, and Democrat senators will once again tweet:

      We have to set an example for the rest of the nation that we will not dismiss a survivor’s claims, and we will not whitewash and sweep under the rug a victim of sexual misconduct just for the convenience of a timetable. pic.twitter.com/9qiurPuOmU

      [hat tip: Edward, just up the thread]

      Wash, rinse repeat. The only question is how long the Republican members of the committee will let them get away with it. I wouldn’t bet against the Democrats getting a good three or four weeks out of this tactic.

      • I doubt it. The polling is turning against her among independents, meaning the non-corrupted. If she refuses to testify, this will backfire against the Democrats. It may have already.

      • I say, that if the Senate Judiciary Committee caves to the absolutely stupid demands laid out by the DNC for Ford to testify, that there’s a 95% chance that before next Thursday, the DNC will have another reason to postpone her testimony.

        Or they will have finally found someone else who has been thoroughly coached to corroborate the claims.

    • Worth listing her demands…

      *demands*…

      Ford will not appear any sooner than next Thursday;
      No questions to be asked at hearing by any outside counsel — only senators;
      Mark Judge must be subpoenaed;
      Kavanaugh would testify first, then Ford would testify, and Kavanaugh would have no opportunity to respond or rebut;
      Deadline for her to provide written statement before the hearing would be waived;
      Provide adequate security;
      Only one pool camera in hearing room;
      Ford and Kavanaugh allotted the same amount of time to talk

      And I can’t find any definitive source yet, but the murmurings I’ve seen are now some additional demands like not having to testify under oath, etc.

      What a fiasco.

      • All to run the clock out…

        • If our constitutional republic makes it through this Leftist rebellion against the American system then it will be a miracle.

          • Blood in the streets, my friend, blood in the streets.

            They will not accept defeat by political means, as they have demonstrated the past two years. Force may be the only option in the end.

            • Still Spartan

              What do you think liberals are going to do? Throw our kale at you?

              • Beats me. We’ve already had one guy try to mass murder GOP cobgressmen and prominent DNC leaders call on others to attack conservatives.

                So we already know y’all are more committed than kale.

                • Exactly. The sheer gall of Spartan to suggest the progressives and liberals are all soft and fuzzy.

                  Ever hear of Antifa? You know, those throwing the first punches during the elections?

                  • But even then, they don’t need the open violence in the streets they’ve been agitating for…they’ll just regain power and use the behemoth force of the executive branch against dissenters.

                    We’ve already had 8 years of an administration, with the cover of a media never call them out, spy on journalists, use agencies to harass and suppress conservative groups and more.

                    I mean what further proof do so-called reasonable liberals need to wonder if something is rotten in Denmark.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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.