Morning Ethics Warm-Up, 3/13/2019: The Defending The Unsavory Edition

Good morning from Alexandria, VA.!

I love Atlanta, but it sure is good to be home.

1. I just posted this note on Facebook to make my “friends'” heads explode:

Rep. Ocasio-Cortez:: “I know when I was growing up, I didn’t see any women like me in positions of leadership, And so when you’re only seeing white dudes just like, running the world, you think you need to act like a white dude to run the world.” She’s a stone-cold bigot as well as arrogant and ignorant. There is no “acting like a white dude” any more than acting like a black dude, or a gay dude, or acting “Asian,” or “acting like a girl.” The woman is an idiot, and is being given a pass by progressives and the media…and many of YOU. She embarrasses her party , the House and her generation just about every time she opens her mouth. Ocasio-Cortez even manages to be an embarrassment to Socialists, which I didn’t think was possible.

2. Now Stop making me defend AOC!Ocasio-Cortez Blames Pipeline That Hasn’t Been Built Yet For An Oil Spill” is a typical headline around conservative media today. It’s a cheap shot: the lively Miss O-C got here South Dakota pipelines mixed up, as would I, as would you. This is the kind of biased and petty “gotchas!’ that these same pundits complain about when the mainstream news media uses them on President Trump. Hypocrites, all of them. The exact same principle applies to Trump and Ocasio-Cortez: they say enough things that genuinely deserved to be criticized without manufacturing targets for mockery.

3.  And stop making me defend Pete Davidson, too! SNL’s Pete Davidson, the same smug jerk who mocked candidate, now Congressman, Dan Crenshaw for wearing an eyepatch (he lost an eye in combat) is under fire again for this joke:

“But if you support the Catholic Church, isn’t that like the same thing as being an R. Kelly fan? I don’t really see the difference, except for one’s music is significantly better.”

The Catholic Church has demanded an apology. Uh-uh. Davidson’s line is hard and valid, and if it leaves a mark, good. Who reviewed the Church’s statement? It actually contains the risible line,  “It is likely that no other institution has done more than the Catholic Church to combat and prevent sexual abuse.” I nearly spit coffee all over my keyboard. I see that Ann Althouse had a similar reaction, writing, “Oh, now you’re making your own joke?”

4.  Stop making me defend Tucker Carlson AGAIN…Sam Donaldson  is alive and well and still an idiot, apparently. I think it may have been Sam, when he routinely made an ass of himself as moderator David Brinkley rolled his eyes when Brinkley was hosting the round-table on ABC’s old Sunday Morning show, who made me realize that a lot of nationally known journalists just weren’t very bright.
Last night on CNN,  Donaldson compared the old comments made by  Fox News’ Tucker Carlson on a shock-jock radio program to the sexual harassment scandals that ended the careers of Matt Lauer and Charlie Rose.  Donaldson made the comments to Anderson Cooper, who must have had trouble booking real guests, or something. Sam reasoned that Carlson should receive the same punishment they did: you know, because politically incorrect banter on the radio is so much like actually abusing people in the workplace.

“Can you think of ‘Good Morning America’ host Matt Lauer or any of the other people — Charlie Rose — saying, well, wait a moment, it was just in jest?” said Donaldson, in the articulate style that made him famous. “It happened long ago, but yes, it’s still important. Your character is important,” he continued.

“This is homophobic speech,” Sam declared. “If left unchecked it will change this country forever.”

Yeah, we really have to do something about speech. Too dangerous.
 “It’s just as bad and should be punished in the way that the men were punished for what they did,” he concluded, referring to Lauer and Rose.continued.

5. I also have to defend Alyssa Milano, unfortunately. Milano, an actress of no great acumen whose routinely uninformed, passionate and reliably woke opinions get far too much publicity for the wan wisdom, depth and experience behind them, was attacked by the social media mob for an exchange on Twitter, where the ex-“Who’s the Boss?” and “Charmed” star does most of her pontificating.“My transgender sisters! I am celebrating YOU this #NationalWomensDay!” tweeted Milano, virtue-signalling like mad. A follower then asked the actress if she was transgender, either as a rebuke or because he’s ten. and she wrote back,

“I’m trans. I’m a person of color. I’m an immigrant. I’m a lesbian. I’m a gay man. I’m the disabled. I’m everything. And so are you, Kirk. Don’t be afraid of what you don’t know or understand. No one wants to hurt you. We are all just looking for our happily ever after.”

Psst! She’s just saying that she has empathy for everybody, even those who are not in her “group.” But metaphor is no bar to contrived outrage in the literal-minded and mean Leftist Universe, so everyone piled on poor Alyssa. This was a typical attack:

WTF That’s not how it works @Alyssa_Milano

You don’t get to identify as it just because you empathize.

Ur not gay, who’s been through that life.

Ur not a person of color, been through it.

You are a rich, white celeb who’s the worst type of feminist


 Milano apologized. This is an example where John Wayne’s line in “She Wore A Yellow Ribbon” is apt: “Don’t apologize. It’s a sign of weakness.” When you’ve done nothing wrong, you should have the integrity and courage to say so. As a well-programmed progressive, however, Milano believes that if one’s words offend anyone, you are obliged to grovel. I guess it serves her right.


30 thoughts on “Morning Ethics Warm-Up, 3/13/2019: The Defending The Unsavory Edition

  1. Ugh, the Catholic diocese whining for an apology is just the worst. In a time when the Church could be aggressively attempting to purge the infection within itself, part of it has resorted to the tactics of the perpetually offended by whining that a TV man said a bad thing.

  2. What’s-her-name: “I know when I was growing up, I didn’t see any women like me in positions of leadership, And so when you’re only seeing white dudes just like, running the world, you think you need to act like a white dude to run the world.”

    Jack writes: “She’s a stone-cold bigot as well as arrogant and ignorant. There is no “acting like a white dude” any more than acting like a black dude, or a gay dude, or acting “Asian,” or “acting like a girl.” The woman is an idiot, and is being given a pass by progressives and the media…and many of YOU. She embarrasses her party, the House and her generation just about every time she opens her mouth. Ocasio-Cortez even manages to be an embarrassment to Socialists, which I didn’t think was possible.”

    OK, now things are getting more clear, at least for me. It is essential to read the books these people are writing to understand their position. I suggest that your retort to her fails to understand a number of things. I will try to break it down:

    The reaction of people of color to the ‘white world’, to the European creation, to the history of colonialism and imperialism, even if they couch it in *justice* and the desire for *fairness*, is not that. It could not be that, and it will not ever be that. It is more, much more. In other words their reverse-bigotry, as you name it, is part of the reversal-outcome that they desire. How could they be satisfied with less? There must be a reverse-imposition, to the degree possible, of what was done to them on those who did it. I think it is very human if I can put it like that.

    But to understand this desire for revenge and reversal one has to grasp the internal aspect of the psychology that is at play: in them. It is not a reasoned position though. It is irrational and somatic. I don’t think this is hard to understand, but one has to turn against one’s own (our own shall I say) wish that it would not be this way. The one who enslaved (the white culture that did the enslaving) never had to deal with what Yancy calls the harm done to the “Black body”.

    Never do the enslaved go upright
    But the crooked necked are ever gnarled
    Just as a squill does not bear roses or hyacinths
    A slave woman does not bear a free child.

    —Theognis of Megara

    The mark is always there, even generations after. Take George Yancy as an illustrative example. Educated at Yale. Having absorbed all the *European categories* and mastered them. He will never cooperate with the ‘white world’ and will never relent in his will to undermine, expose and destroy ‘whiteness’.

    The ghettos of America provide the evidence of resistance. It is not that they were marginalized because they were not needed (though they were), it is that they tell you of their own marginalization. They are not a part of *America* as you define it. These are people in communities who cannot — will not! — get to the point even of speaking the language of the host-country. They manifest in their *bodies* (at a somatic/psychological level) their refusal to *follow orders*. If one does not understand this essential motive of reaction, I do not think one can understand the animus that is now manifesting itself as a species of violence against whiteness. Given the opportunity they will rise up in social and political manifestation.

    That animus cannot be denied, negotiated with, discredited, pushed aside or mocked. Those *black bodies* have to create their world, in their terms, even if it is a world of disasters. And ‘whiteness’ stands in their way. It will be their world they create, not the white man’s.

    White dudes running the world is a related problem, for them. It is not a question of sharing power, or being given some power. The psychological demand is that power is claimed.

    One needs to develop a whole other way of seeing *them* and what is going on.

    • Oh, I understand just fine. But it’s simple double standards crap. The “reasons” for the double-standards are all rationalizations. There are always reason for bigotry, mostly a deficiency in brain cells.White men do not all act alike any more that Asian women.

    • Exactly who captured and sold those rounded up to Europeans. This is not to absolve the European slave trade but to remind people that seem to forget that African Kings found human chattel a valuable commodity to trade for finer imports.

      More to the point I could say that POC are the proximate cause of enslavement of so many Americans, white, black, brown, male and female, to their opiods. How is getting a person addicted so you can profit any different than using people to pick a crop so you can profit.

      If blacks have an issue about ancestral slavery then Jews can lay a similar claim at Egyptions. Blacks should hold animus toward the Portugese who started the whole African slave trade. Mexicans and South Americans should focus their anger at the descendents of Cortez an Pizarro.

      I have seen this argument over and over that all things that have retarded the development of POC is of European making. This is fallacious because it willfully ommits major relevent historical factors.

      • The entire issue is so so so complex and multi-layered. It deals with profound psychological issues, issues of idealism, or disappointment, anger, ressentiment, revenge, jealousy. And it also has to do with *core definitions about America*. About power . . . it is endless, and endlessly complex.

        What do you think is going to happen in America, Chris? A bold and risky prediction!

        And the sub-question: What is going to happen in Europe which is dealing with similar, but different, issues?

        • Aliza, there will be one of three outcomes: (unlikely) calm pragmatic minds will prevail and identity politics will die a richly deserved death.

          Identity politics will continue to fester until the mid 21st century when demographic shifts render caucasions to roughly equal in number to hispanics at which point Hispanics and Caucasions will be the new majority with a new name. Blacks and indigenous peoples of South and Central America will create a coalition with blacks creating a new category to amass more political power to compete for resources against Hispanowhites.

          The other option is we devolve into civil wars that renders our economic system disfuntional and government initiates martial law. At this point all tribes shift their attacks on government. We will become just like the middle east and Obamas fundamental transformation of America will be complete.

          • Interesting. My first observation is to notice that you say that identity politics should die a ‘richly deserved death’. While I do understand that this is, in its way, the PC idea for proper Liberals, I am beginning to question if the denial of identity categories (racial, ethnic, cultural, linguistic) is not the root and origin of the problem. Wouldn’t this be a strange reversal? That instead of establishing as a social, cultural or even moral project of ‘blending’ or ‘co-existing’ in close proximity, what if it were decided to assert exactly the opposite? And to do it in a *calmly pragmatic* way.

            This would preserve *diversity* in a real sense.

            My other comment is that, based on what I have read and some of what I have seen (when I lived in Sacramento), Blacks and Latinos do not get along. They have significant problems not the least being the language divide. They might develop a coalition as you say, but it would quickly break apart.

            My other *untoward assertion* is that each of these groups depends on White America. Put another way if white America simply chose, as if by magic, to put up with none of this, to accept itself as racist and ‘supremacist’ (and all the terrible things POC say about Whites and whiteness), wouldn’t that be interesting? But it could only be predicated on the statement: “Yes, everything you say about us is completely right. We will never fundamentally change. You will always be unhappy in our proximity. Therefore, the best option for us, and for you, is political separation. Let’s carry it out.”

          • George Yancy again in Backlash: What Happens When We Talk About Racism In America:

            The problem, though, is that white supremacy, white normativity, white power and privilege are not benign; they are toxic, malignant, deadly. Your insulation from confronting your whiteness comes at an ugly and terrible
            price — you live a diminished and truncated life of what it means to be truly human, and we are reminded constantly that our humanity doesn’t matter. But then again, within white supremacy, our humanity is a misnomer. We
            were never quite human, perhaps even never really meant to exist, despite the fact that your existence as white depends upon your distance from us
            as Black. In fact, where would you be without us? Where would you be without the false and ugly construction of us that you have used to insulate you from engaging in an honest and truthful confrontation with your own ugly history, your own whiteness? Lorde writes, “For to survive in the
            mouth of this dragon we call America, we [Black women and men] have
            had to learn this first and most vital lesson-that we were never meant to
            survive. Not as human beings. Whether you know it or not, whiteness is an expression of misanthropy. The white racist violation of our humanity is
            the story of Black life in America. That is the story of this letter writer who would dare to be human, who would dare to ask you to confront your
            whiteness, your inhumanity.

  3. Re No. 2: The Inestimable and Irrepressible Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.’

    I dunno if she is entitled to a pass on mixing up the pipelines. She was reading from file notes and the questions seemed pre-screened or written for her.

    So, if that is the case, then she should have known that Wells Fargo simply financed the pipeline (one of 16 other finance companies), in accordance with federal, state, and tribal rules. She also should have known that finance companies have no liability under state or federal law for providing financing to these types of projects even under the expansive definition of “PRPs”, or potential responsible parties under the Super Fund rules. if Wells Fargo provided money but took no part in the planning, execution, and management of the project, it is immune from liability.

    If she didn’t know that, then she should have researched it, which is a breach of her ethical obligation to be informed about the matters before that committee. If she did know that, and still asked those questions, then she is not dumb, as many say, but a manipulative ideologue of dangerous proportions.


    • I’m not saying she should get a pass so much as saying that accusing her of claiming that a pipeline that hasn’t been built yet has been leaking is a deliberate misrepresentation of what she said to make her sound even dumber than she is.

      • I have to disagree. She asked pointed, loaded, gotcha questions to make Wells Fargo look evil. For instance, she asked why Wells Fargo finances the caging of children because it loaned money to a company the built a private detention center used by ICE. She read prepared questions but did not have her facts straight.

        She is a member of Congress acting like a high school sophomore third string debater. She doesn’t have the right to make stupid mistakes. She is going to make nationalbpublic policy that will have an impact farther reaching than the district she represents. Her stupidity will cost all of us. So, no. I won’t decry the mockery she is justly receiving.


        • All true, but she still didn’t really talk about spills from an imaginary pipeline. Again, there are so many real things she does and says that can be attacked. It’s ridiculous to have to exaggerate.

  4. #3 My chatolic friends are actively distancing themselves from the Catholic church, a bunch have already switched to Lutheran or non-denominational churches.

    P.S. There really is a problem with the music in the Catholic church because a lot of the bishops won’t allow modern Christian praise music in their churches and it’s driving people away. There is a lot of really good Christian rock out there and a lot of it is predictably crossing over and being acceptable in mainstream “pop”.

  5. 1 AOC

    Well, don’t make us wait with bated breath — did your friends’ heads explode? Details, dammit!

    2 Pipelines and AOC

    Just as a stopped clock is right twice a day, AOC deserves a sympathetic nod, but only about 10% as often.

    You have to give her credit, though — for an airhead, she manages to have everyone on both sides talking about her all the time. What was that thing about publicity, again?

    3 Pete Davidson

    Harsh, but fair.

    And, the lack of self and situational awareness in the leadership of the Catholic church is… disturbing.

    4 Tucker Carlson

    Yeah, we really have to do something about speech. Too dangerous.

    Speech=Violence. That’s what I’ve heard. Looks like Sam Donaldson is a believer.

    5 Alyssa Milano

    I can’t defend her if she can’t defend herself. She is a woke coward with the intellect of a rabbit. Elmer Fudd and Wile E. Coyote were Mensa candidates by comparison.

    Your defense of her is sweet, ethical, and misguided. Some people simply can’t be defended rationally, even when they deserve it.

    • Glenn Logan wrote, “Well, don’t make us wait with bated breath — did your friends’ heads explode? Details, dammit!”

      Read my comment above, the attempts to silence Jack is going on right now.

  6. #4 The First Amendment free speech rights don’t seem hold the same clout for “people” anymore, if you say something that someone else doesn’t “like” now they think your life should be destroyed because of it.

    I keep saying that our Constitution is on it’s way out if we the people don’t stop being apathetic about these things and stand up, forcibly if necessary, against these totalitarian fascists that want to control every aspect of our society including our thoughts. Reeducation camps are right around the corner.

  7. I know this is a slightly older post, but this is the most recent post here I found that talks about Representative Ocasio-Cortez. Found this article today, about her wanting to pressure banks into not financing certain types of companies.

    Article here:

    What got me is her quote towards the beginning of the article, given to Politico, the site that hosts the article.

    “There’s more than one way to skin a cat, and not everything has to be done through legislation explicitly. We can also use the tools that we have here to pressure change in other ways as well.”

    It seems to me that is signature significance for an elected official indicating their willingness to ignore the rule of law and utilize authoritarian rule. But hey, it must be alright if the despot is enlightened and just wants to force through (allegedly) needed social change, right?

Leave a Reply to Zoltar Speaks! Cancel reply

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

You are commenting using your 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.