1. Political, not logical, honest or competent…Actress Ellen Page, 33, best known for her performance as the pregnant teen in “Juno,” announced this week that she was “non-binary” trans. “My pronouns are he/they and my name is Elliot. I feel lucky to be writing this. To be here. To have arrived at this place in my life,” she wrote. Immediately, Netflix began changing Ellen Page’s name to Elliot in the credits all Netflix movies and series she had participated in. Now, for example, the IMDb page for the Netflix original series “The Umbrella Academy” says Elliot Page was in the cast. This is being called an “update.” It isn’t an update. It’s a lie, and airbrushing history.
When Al Hedison starred as “The Fly” in the original horror movie, that’s who he was. Later, Al changed his name to David Hedison for some reason, and that was the actor we watched in “Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea,” Irwin Allen’s wonderfully cheesy Sixties TV sci-fi series, and as one of the many Felix Leiters in the James Bond films. They didn’t change his credit on “The Fly.” Nor do you see the name Jack Palance in the credits as the evil gunslinger in “Shane” In that film, the actor we now know as Jack was going by “Walter.” And that’s who he was…then.
Identities are not retroactive. Actress Linda Day had a substantial career in television before she met and married actor Christopher George in 1970. Thereafter, she performed under the name of Linda Day George, but no one changed her credits on the shows she had previously performed in as Linda Day, because Christoper George was barely a twinkle in her eye then. This isn’t hard. Netflix is rushing to retroactively alter history not because doing so is accurate or true, but to demonstrate that the company is “woke,” and thus supporting Page as well as trans people everywhere. It’s virtue-signaling, and a particularly dumb and misleading version of it.
Oh, I should mention that Olympic athlete Bruce Jenner was not Caitlyn Jenner when he won his Gold medals in male events. Olympic records were not changed to claim a falsehood and an impossibility.
2. “Was that wrong? Should I not have done that?” The New York Daily News reports that a Staten Island high school teacher, so far unnamed, was seen naked and masturbating during a Zoom conference this week.
Apparently he tried to invoke Rationalization #3, The Unethical Role Model: “He/She would have done the same thing,” pointing out that “Jeffrey Toobin did it!” (Kidding!)
As with Toobin, I don’t understand the thought process, if you could call it that, that could produce such conduct. I also don’t understand the various statements in the aftermath of the Staten Island incident as described in the story. It wasn’t clear if the teacher intentionally exposed himself or if the video call involved students, the Daily News noted. So what? The conduct is nuts and requires firing for cause either way. I suppose intentionally behaving like this on Zoom is a crime, or more likely, evidence of mental illness.
I also enjoyed the Captain Obvious aspect of the statement by the school:
“This extremely disturbing alleged behavior has absolutely no place in our schools and was immediately reported to the NYPD. The teacher was immediately reassigned away from students pending the outcome of an investigation.”
3. Ruth Bader Ginsberg’s idol! The country’s oldest sitting federal judge, Thomas Reavley of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at Louisiana, has died at age 99. Of course he was sitting because he couldn’t stand up! HAR!
I hate to disrespect the dead, but it was wildly unethical and irresponsible for Reavley to be still hearing cases at his age, indeed at his age 20 years ago. The ABA Journal story quotes the judge’s former clerk and the Journal’s current columnist Bryan Garner as saying that the late jurist “had complete integrity…He was the epitome of what you would want a judge to be: knowledgeable, thorough, hardworking, fair and deeply compassionate.” How can anyone say he had integrity if he didn’t respect his profession, the law and the public sufficiently to retire? I know I want a judge to be knowledgeable, thorough, hardworking, fair and deeply compassionate, and not an age-diminished shadow of his former self.
4. Krugman being Krugman, the Times being the Times. There are several New York Times columnists I just can’t read any more without my head exploding. Prime among them is the disgraceful economist/blowhard Paul Krugman, who has used his inexplicable 2008 Nobel Prize to claim authority and hornswoggle gullible readers into believing his extreme partisan opinions and routine misrepresentations are trustworthy. He was in fine form last week, when he asked, in his most recent column, “How will Biden deal with Republican sabotage?”
When Joe Biden is inaugurated, he will immediately be confronted with an unprecedented challenge — and I don’t mean the pandemic, although Covid-19 will almost surely be killing thousands of Americans every day. I mean, instead, that he’ll be the first modern U.S. president trying to govern in the face of an opposition that refuses to accept his legitimacy. And no, Democrats never said Donald Trump was illegitimate, just that he was incompetent and dangerous.
This had heads exploding across the country. Not only did Democrats repeatedly say that Trump was illegitimate for all four years of his term, Krugman himself said so, and more than once. One industrious Twitter user assembled the evidence:
I get sick of writing this, but where are the editors? Surely everyone on the Times staff, unless they refuse to read this creep too, had to know that Krugman’s claim that no Democrats ever said Trump wasn’t a legitimate President is a Jumbo (“Elephant? What elephant?”) Why didn’t someone stop him? Was the paper trying to embed that false narrative? (I have had many, many Democrat-defending friends claim that there was no Democratic effort to sabotage President Trump or to tar him as illegitimate.) Wouldn’t such a statement immediately set off ethics alarms for anyone of any political persuasion who isn’t in a coma?
After all the hilarity ensued, the Times, as reported by “Sister Toldjah” at Red State, quietly changed Krugman’s words to “And no, Democrats by and large were not claiming Donald Trump was illegitimate, just that he was incompetent and dangerous.”
Oh yeah, that makes it fine. That new statement is also false. The only ethical remedy for Krugman’s column is to fire Krugman out of respect for readers
5. Why do we tolerate this? After not playing for nearly nine months, the United States women’s soccer team, in its first game since the George Floyd Freakout, began their game with the Netherlands’ national team by going onto the field wearing jackets reading “Black Lives Matter,” and then did Kaepernicks during the playing of the American national anthem. The team also released this fatuous statement:
We love our country, and it is a true honor to represent America. It is also our duty to demand that the liberties and freedoms that our country was founded on extend to everyone. Today, we wear Black Lives Matter to affirm human decency. We protest against racial injustice and police brutality against Black people. We protest against the racist infrastructures that do not provide equal opportunity for Black and brown people to fulfill their dreams, including playing on this team. As the United States Women’s National team players, we collectively work toward a society where the American ideals are upheld, and Black lives are no longer systematically targeted.
Black Lives Matter.
Utter, irredeemable BS:
- If you “love your country,” why are you embarrassing it on foreign soil?
- No, it’s your duty to play soccer as well as you can. You are no diplomats or politicians, and if you want to shoot off your mouths, do it on your own time.
- Our liberties and freedoms do extend to everyone, even when they abuse them—like the women’s soccer team.
- Wearing Black Lives Matter “to affirm human decency” is a contradiction in terms. Black Lives Matter has participated in riots, encouraged attacks on police, and spread its own brand of racism. It distributes lies and propaganda, uses intimidation and extortion to further its political agenda.
- There is no evidence that “racist infrastructures,” if there are any, have any effect on the composition of sports teams. Are our soccer players aware of the NBA? The NFL?
- Claiming that black lives are “systematically targeted” is a flat-out lie.
The U.S. men’s soccer team, earlier this month, wore pre-game jackets with the words “Be the Change” emblazoned on the front and various messages on the back including, “Black Lives Matter,” “Be Anti-Racist,” and “Unity,” according to ESPN.
I don’t want ignorant, racist-sloganeering, anti-American fools representing me or my country abroad. Does anyone?