Weekend Ethics Warm-Up, 6/4/2020: Bring On Those Lazy, Hazy, Crazy, Unethical Days…

Indoctrination is everywhere, and you WILL be assimilated. Waiting for my car to be delivered from the garage by Valet Parking at the D.C. Marriott Hotel, I saw that there were four channels playing in the lobby for guests: CNN, MSNBC, Bloomberg and Fox…Sports. The news channels were all braying about Peter Navarro, a Trump advisor I barely remembered, being indicted as if it were the equivalent of the Watergate tapes being revealed. Fox News had more viewers than CNN and MSNBC combined for very good reasons, by never mind. THAT news is biased

1. Lazy! Speaking of propaganda, the ostentatious “Pride Month” pandering is already suffocating and it’s only the 4th. Why is a month dedicated to LGBTQ promotion? Wouldn’t it make more sense to promote heterosexuality—you know, for survival of the species purposes? Pretty much every day is “Pride Propaganda Day” now—isn’t the Month redundant now? And what the hell is there to be proud of? Holding that someone should not be awash in shame for something they have no control of isn’t the same as concluding they should be proud of it. I’m not ashamed of being bald, but why would I be proud of it?

The corporate pandering is particularly nauseating (and suffocating), with rainbows attached to everything. One, it reminds me of the saccharine Seventies and the costumes in “Godspell,” and Two, I think of that kid pouring maple syrup on everything on his dinner plate in “To Kill A Mockingbird.” “What in the Sam Hill are you doing?” Scout blurts out, rudely. I feel like her. A progressive website was shocked and angry to discover, and complained accordingly, that 25 major corporations that have been the most publicly rainbow-besotted also  donated more than $13.2 million to what it calls “anti-LGBTQ politicians” since the start of 2021. Well, to progressives, holding that  teachers shouldn’t be giving classes in fellatio to third-graders is “anti-LGBTQ,” but more to the point, those corporations are all insincere, and following what they perceive as virtue-signalling mandates, just as they were when they sucked up to Black Lives Matter.2. Hazy! This Unethical Quote Of The Week is so, so many things...Congressman Mondaire Jones (D-NY) ranted on the House floor:

Enough is enough. Enough of you telling us that school shootings are effective life when every other country like ours has virtually ended. Enough of you blaming mental illness then defunding mental health care in this country. Enough of your thoughts and prayers. Enough. Enough. You will not stop us from advancing the ‘Protecting Our Kids’ Act today. You will not stop us from passing it in the House next week and you will not stop us. If the filibuster obstructs us, we will abolish it. If the Supreme Court objects, we will expand it. We will not rest until we have taken weapons of war out of circulation in our communities.

At least he didn’t say, “We will bury you!” and bang his show on his desk. This guy is a Harvard lawyer, and he really thinks the government can confiscate legally-purchased guns. He apparently can’t add, either, because the Democrats don’t have the votes to pack the Supreme Court or to eliminate the filibuster and aren’t likely to get them. This is how partisan legislating goes now: insult, make up stuff, and threaten.

Pop quiz: how much misinformation was in that projectile word vomit? I count at least six.

3. Crazy! Huh. Who could have ever predicted this would happen? The unethical practice of placing ideology, how you wish the world would work, over reality, which is how we know, or should know, the world works based on experience, observation and common sense, is once again being demonstrated in Oregon (once again demonstrated, and once again in Oregon). In November 2020, Oregon voters approved ballot measure 110, making Oregon the first state to decriminalize the possession of hard drugs, like heroin. It made possession of “personal use amounts” of street drugs like heroin or meth punishable by a citation of up to $100, and, of course, moved taxpayer funds to those magical drug treatment programs. The citations and fine could be waived if the offender called a hotline that would offer a “health assessment.”

Good plan! The Beach Boys had a song foreseeing it called “Wouldn’t It Be Nice,”and Leslie Gore predicted the policy with her song, “Sunshine, Lollipops and Rainbows”!


Officials at the Oregon Health Authority testified to legislative committees last week that  the new policy was not doing well, to say the least. One district reported a 700% increase in overdoses.  Of the 1,885 people who got tickets in the first year of the program, only 91 called the hotline. The rest were presumably looking for their next fix. An earlier report in January by Oregon Catalyst found that of the 68 people who had called the hotline by that point, 49 expressed no interest in getting help, and only 11 were connected to treatment services.

4. Amazy! Trump makes sense! In a May 27 letter to the Pulitzer Prize people, former President Trump asked when the committee would review and retract the journalism awards given to the New York Times and Washington Post for brilliant reporting that falsely represented the Trump-Russian collusion hoax as factual, which we now know it was not. Despite  claiming it “has a standing process for reviewing questions about past awards, under the guidelines of which complaints are considered by an appointed committee,” the Pulitzer Prize Board hasn’t said whether it will reconsider the 2018 Pulitzer Prizes for National Reporting it granted to the Post and Times for promoting the Russia collusion narrative.

We know the answer, though. The Pulitzers still haven’t withdrawn the fake history prizes it awarded for the “1619 Project.” Heck, it hasn’t even updated its website, which still says,

For deeply sourced, relentlessly reported coverage in the public interest that dramatically furthered the nation’s understanding of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and its connections to the Trump campaign, the President-elect’s transition team and his eventual administration.

Deeply sourced! Futhered understanding!

“How can I get my reputation back?” Trump asked in the letter. The better question is how the Pulitzers get their reputation back. If I have anything to do with it, the answer is “Never!”

40 thoughts on “Weekend Ethics Warm-Up, 6/4/2020: Bring On Those Lazy, Hazy, Crazy, Unethical Days…

  1. #1,,,,While so many virtue-signalers are twisting themselves into pretzels during Pride month….applauding and encouraging pride in skin color, pride in gender choice – neither of which define an individual’s character, competence, or compassion – some of us are just proud to be independent thinkers who don’t need a pandering parade to let us know we are good parents, helpful neighbors, economically savvy, honest people, and more-than-competent workers. We’re proud of following the law and proud of those demanding accountability from those who don’t. ‘We’re proud to know people who make a herculean effort to keep order in our naturally diverse society. We’re proud of cleaning up our part of the community while expecting others to do the same without being asked. We are proud of paying attention to news beyond the headlines – thinking issues through rather than letting emotions rule our actions and votes. And, we are proud to be citizens of a country that offers incredible opportunities to those of any color, gender, size, economic status, etc. who make a sincere effort to stand apart from the whining mob by exhibiting responsibility, respect, and restraint in their daily lives. No parade needed….but an occasional acknowledgement that we exist would be nice. There are so many more genuine qualities to really be proud of – qualities that truly define the character of a society. Add yours dear readers.

  2. The reason Pride Month exists in its current form is because some humans still don’t get the basic concept of not being bigots towards gender/sexually/romantically nonconforming humans (a nice catch-all phrase I adapted from somewhere, which we can abbreviate as GSRN unless we want to rearrange the adjectives). The reason they don’t get the basic concept of not being bigots is because most of their exposure to GSRN (other than bigoted propaganda and the caricatures they grew up with) is from aggressive people who think that noise and emotion substitute for conversation. Unsurprisingly, noise and emotion are not only not persuasive to bigots (nor to reasonable people for that matter) but are likely to make them even more convinced they are justified in their opinions and attitudes. Bigots successfully avoid or intimidate into silence most of the people who are less aggressive and more articulate, although the articulate people are still working on outreach.

    It seems to me that many “Pride” demonstrations are an overcompensation based in the fundamental motivation of boldness. Bigotry both explicit and implicit oppresses GSRN people in a way that other minorities are seldom oppressed: if they fear any bigotry in their environments, they have to conceal their feelings from just about everyone they know. Having to conceal one’s feelings fosters a great boldness-responsiveness in many people: they desire to exert a chaotic influence, to break the rules and expectations that have been set for them.

    Therefore, once an oppressed person is free to express themselves how they please, they may try to deviate as much as possible from convention instead of just being who they otherwise would be if they had never had to hide. In extreme cases a person may seek emotional satisfaction in offending, disturbing, or otherwise antagonizing other people through what they do with their newly claimed freedom. More often a person may take some time to discover what they like without paying any attention whatsoever to what other people think about it. Boldness-responsiveness in general is not uncommon in young people (who are outgrowing the rules that were imposed on them for most of their lives) and can most readily be seen in rebellious or countercultural movements such as “punk”.

    I can’t really fault a GSRN person for reveling in the ability to freely explore what they want to do and how they want to appear when they’ve never been able to do that before. However, if the foremost ambassadors for GSRN rights only ever talk about their own values and don’t take time to listen to and deconstruct the bigots’ fears, they’re not going to succeed at eliminating bigotry. This sort of thing is why I developed the toolbox of foundational concepts that makes deconstruction fast and easy, so we can move these conversations forward.

    • If we define bigotry as an unwillingness to be tolerant of others because of some immutable characteristic then there are plenty of LGBTQ bigots who exhibit similar behaviors.
      I would wager most if not damn near all Americans don’t care who another loves or with whom they have sex. What they object to is what many Gay pride parades were in the past; nothing more than an explicit showcase of various fetishes, drag queens, and other displays of outlandish sexualized behavior.
      If gay pride parades were simply couples of the same sex marching to show how much alike they are to heterosexual persons then much of what you term bigotry would dissipate.
      In fairness to the very religious, it is not hate that drives them to condemn the different orientation it is that they wish to side with their understanding of scripture because not doing so would undermine the faith. By not trying to understand why people of faith reject homosexuality and try to ruin them in court the LGBTQ sect alienates even fence sitters who would be inclined to live and let live will see that as a means to bully and the straight into submission.

      • You expressed my thoughts as well, Chris.
        At first read, it was struck by EC’s use of “bigotry,” which means an obstinate or unreasonable attachment to a belief, opinion, or faction, and in particular, prejudice against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group. That is a loaded term: bigotry implies not just ignorance but bad intent and bad beliefs, misfeasance versus malfeasance. It surprising that an opinion piece about respect and understanding would so systematically isolate and alienate those who don’t openly accept, embrace and promote the Alphabet Soup Community, which clearly was intended to exactly opposite of what EC is promoting. In my mind, it is a mutual Golden Rule matter.


        • I was talking about methods to approach actual bigots, as you define them, which would actually lead them to reconsider their feelings about and treatment of other people. These methods would work even better on people who by your definition are not bigoted, and who are probably very nice people, but who for some reason take their morality cues from books that recount in great detail several holy crimes against humanity. If part of showing them respect is not referring to them as bigots, fine. Some tropes use the word “bigot” in ways that led me to believe that maliciousness was not part of the definition. Does that make more sense?

      • “If gay pride parades were simply couples of the same sex marching to show how much alike they are to heterosexual persons then much of what you term bigotry would dissipate.”

        “By not trying to understand why people of faith reject homosexuality and try to ruin them in court the LGBTQ sect alienates even fence sitters who would be inclined to live and let live will see that as a means to bully and the straight into submission.”

        Yes, those were the points I was making. I don’t see the disagreement here. Was I too roundabout in how I expressed them?

        • I understood that but the use of the term bigot obscured your point. My only difference of opinion might lie with implication that people of faith who object to various lifestyle choices such as polyamory or gender fluidity and non-lifestyle orientations hold irrational points of view because they believe the words in a holy book. I am not particularly religious but I follow most Judeao-Christian tenets. I believe their is something greater than ourselves and virtually all monotheistic religions are interpretations of some true word that will only reveal itself in the future.

    • Pride month, and other specialty months, are nothing but a demand that people care about things that most people do not care about. You are gay? Cool. You are black? Cool? You are a one eyed, one toed, flying people eater? I think you might need some therapy, but whatever. As long as I don’t have to get involved, I’m fine with whatever shenanigans consenting adults decide to get up to.

      I am not fine with those adults inflicting their narcissistic need for approval and attention on me with shrill demands that I care about whatever category they have dreamed up for themselves. That is what most of these months are.

      Humans have a limited capacity for caring about the problems of people they don’t know. If humans spend all their time caring about people they do not know, then there are no resources left over for the people they actually do know, society collapses and chaos ensues. Indefinite misapplication of emotion, time and resources is not healthy. This is why humans care about individuals, not groups.

      I care about my friends and family who are gay or black or whatever intersectional groups have been lately invented, but not those groups as a whole. I don’t have time or emotional capacity to care about them in aggregate. If some member of a group is suffering acutely in proximity to me and within my social circle, then I will care. Otherwise, I will not. This is not bigotry, but only healthy allocation of my time and energy.

      Demanding that I care more about nameless, faceless groups of people more than the people who actually matter to me is unethical.

      Past that, it isn’t ethical to lump a bunch of people together and demand homogenized conformity to characteristics unrelated to the individual. It is harmful to demand that simply because individuals share one characteristic they share many other unrelated characteristics. It is especially harmful to demand that humans who don’t share any characteristics share uniform characteristics based on arbitrarily defined categories which share no common ground. If the emotional harm inflicted on humans by a social practice outweighs the emotional harm alleviated by a social practice, then the social practice is a net harm, and unethical.

      Lifestyles on the margins of normal human social behavior are marginal from an evolutionary standpoint because they threaten the survival of the species. The idea that all thought and behavior patterns, no matter how marginal, can be normalized without harming the species as a whole, is nonsense. Pandas are going extinct because they have little drive to mate. If large quantities of humans decide to normalize asexuality, the same phenomenon will occur in humans. The same goes for any other marginal sexual behavior.

      These issues are far larger than mere bigotry. One side of the argument would like to blur all the lines so they can continue inflicting emotional vampirism and mass societal harm on large groups of people for social and political gain. That is the entire purpose of postmodernist lines of thought. They continue to invent a steady stream of smaller and smaller categories while demanding more and more people care about them. It is unsustainable and unethical.

      • I gather my comment was not nearly as clear as I intended it to be. In short, my point is that there are valid motivations and values behind having a Pride Month, but that there are probably better ways of fulfilling those motivations and values than having a Pride Month.

        Part of Pride Month is trying to get people to accept GSRN people, and the other part is to create a place where GSRN people can, in theory, feel accepted. I think getting people to accept GSRN people requires a set of skills that the people in the spotlight aren’t using, although it’s likely that the quiet people use those skills and we just don’t hear about it. They’re probably more successful at creating a place where GSRN people can feel accepted, which is great. I’m pretty sure the tackiness turns off some of the people they’re trying to support, though, so they might want to add a bit more nuance to that as well.

        Eventually I’m hoping that each group celebration month becomes just another Schelling point for people with a particular set of interests, like a sports season or a fan convention.

        I don’t think we have any major disagreements.

        • EC
          I take some exception to your original post. My first issue is your use of the term bigot. It is a very derogatory snarl word. For me, the use of snarl words in communications detracts from the argument the writer or speaker is trying to make. I prefer the term zealot, a synonym of bigot. It means the same without the inflammatory connotation. The thing about bigots, zealots, and fanatics is that without a life-changing experience, no argument or amount of diversity training is going to change their minds. So, if you can’t change the mind of a zealot, why antagonize the moderates, and the get out of my face, I neither care nor want to know your sexual preference people?

          My next issue is your argument is you seem to state that the noise and emotion exhibited by LGBTQ, GSRN, EIEIO, etc. pride actions are counterproductive since they don’t change the mind of the zealot and turn the moderates against the activists. A statement I totally agree with. But then you go on to make excuses for the boisterous activists in pride events. I think making excuses for bad behavior is unethical and counterproductive to advancing the understanding I think you may be trying to promote.

          You go on to state, “Bigotry both explicit and implicit oppresses GSRN people in a way that other minorities are seldom oppressed”, but you don’t state the nature of these unique oppressions. Statements without supporting examples are impossible to objectively evaluate. They could easily be fact, fiction, or hype.

          You speak of GSRN rights. I fail to understand why the rights detailed in our constitution are insufficient for some segments of our society. Politicians have passed hate crime legislation which can come into play for say the murder of a gay or a black. Are we to conclude that the murder of a white heterosexual is not a hateful act?

          You seem to suggest that the aggressive people who think that noise and emotion substitute for conversation are a minority of your GSRN community. I must ask where is this tolerant, righteous majority when the radical GSRNs are attacking corporations for not paying protection money? Why don’t they come to the aid of a bakery that is destroyed because they did not want to bake a cake for a gay wedding for religious reasons? Was it because it was the only one bakery within 100 miles of the event or is some other motive afoot?

          I have no use for a person or organization that says the beliefs and practices of the GSRN community take precedence over the religious beliefs of others, especially since the free exercise of religion is specifically enumerated in the Constitution and who you prefer to sleep with is not.

          You state, “I can’t really fault a GSRN person for reveling in the ability to freely explore what they want to do and how they want to appear when they’ve never been able to do that before.” You seem to imply the GSRN community is experiencing some new freedom that
          heretofore did not exist. Again, you make a blanket statement without supporting facts. How recent is this new freedom? Over 40 years ago my wife, my sister-in-law, her husband, and I enjoyed some drinks at the poolside bar at the Ice Palace on Fire Island watching the Miss Fire Island Pageant. The pageant is basically drags on parade. From my perspective, I did not see anyone who looked inhibited or oppressed.

          The LGBTQ and BLM movements are very useful to politicians and progressives because they are used to divide us as a nation. The left and the right use these issues to lock in their supporters and then work on the middle. Regrettably, the media, entertainment, and big tech are squarely rooting for the progressives so picking off the center is not that difficult. If the U.S. is such a racist, bigoted, oppressive country, why are so many people breaking down the doors to get here?

          In general, I have no use for any type of Pride month, week, or day. These pride proclamations are a political ploy to garner votes by pandering. For example, FDR created Columbus Day to appeal to the Italian ancestry constituency.

          I would like to see it fashionable to have pride in country, pride in hard work, pride in accomplishment, and pride in a person’s content of character. Why have all these virtues been under attack for decades if not to divide us?

          • 1. I’m sorry if the word “bigot” seems like it’s directed at you. You may want to refer to my reply to johnburger2013, where I clarify that my prescribed approach to bigots should work even better on people who are not actually bigots. I’ll draw more of a distinction in the future.

            I cannot use the word “zealot” (a person with strong beliefs about which they are passionate) as a substitute for “bigot” (a person who has preconceived opinions about a group of people and is resistant to updating those beliefs) because they are not synonyms. Not all bigots are zealots and vice versa.

            2. It was my intent to explain why people feel like being loud and tacky, and sometimes aggressive, but not to excuse aggressive behavior. As far as being loud and tacky goes, I can only criticize it if it’s meant to be endearing to people who are apprehensive about GSRN people, because it evidently fails at that goal. If it’s just supposed to be ordinary self-indulgent revelry, then it’s no more unethical than Mardi Gras.

            3. As a matter of fact, I do state the nature of the unique oppressions. It’s literally in the same sentence from which you quoted a part.

            4. I didn’t speak of GSRN rights. I spoke of “the foremost ambassadors for GSRN rights”. (Emphasis added.) Are you trying to criticize me for referring to a concept about which I make no comment? How would you have me phrase what they stand for, when “gay rights” or “LGBTQ rights” is how they phrase it? “The GSRN cause?” “GSRN fair treatment?” “GSRN acceptance?”

            5. Where is the tolerant, righteous majority, you ask? They’re probably keeping their heads down and staying out of trouble, just like the tolerant, righteous Christian majority and the tolerant, righteous majorities of every other group. If you want to work with the tolerant, righteous GSRN people to reconcile the “zealots” of their group with the “zealots” of yours, I’m sure they’d be happy to help.

            6. Congratulations, you have a constitutional right to believe that a transcendent being committed crimes against humanity and that serving it is the greatest thing you can aspire to. Ninth Amendment: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” If this is about the cake thing, it’s not about precedence. It’s about whether people can be denied a generic service if the religion of the service provider says it’s immoral. I don’t have a strong opinion about that case, but I do have some questions. I’m an atheist, so would they deny me a wedding cake on the basis that I don’t believe I could be joined to another person by a higher power? What if I order a wedding cake just so I can eat it, with no marriage involved at all?

            7. You may not be aware of this, but in many places GSRN kids get ostracized by their peers, and so they have to hide their feelings. I’m just as boggled by it as you are. It seems like it’d be so easy to just treat people like people and then we wouldn’t need this whole song and dance, so to speak.

            8. I agree that the whole GSRN issue is a political football that people make much more complicated than it needs to be. What the hell does immigration have to do with what I said? Don’t put words in my mouth. I never said that the United States was so oppressive that people wouldn’t want to come here. Openly GSRN people don’t need to fear immigrating to the U.S. because they can settle down in a place that’s friendly to them. The problem is that not everywhere in the U.S. (or the world, for that matter) is GSRN-accepting, and furthermore GSRN people actually have to grow up in those places.

            9. I’m inclined to agree with your last two paragraphs. I’d like to throw in “critical thinking” as something people should take pride in.

            • EC
              Regarding the word bigot. I was merely providing constructive criticism based on my sales and marketing experience and effective communication styles. I only wished to give you the benefit of my experience. It has been my experience that the use of snarl words often diminishes the acceptance of an argument one is trying to make. What people do with my advice is entirely up to them and of no concern to me. In retrospect, I had not understood you purposely chose to use a derogatory term.

              You begin your response to my commentary by stating, “I’m sorry if the word “bigot” seems like it’s directed at you.” Based on your writing and word choices, you are clearly neither a simpleton nor an idiot. Therefore, alluding that I thought the term bigot was directed toward me is a rather clumsy but subversive effort to paint me as a bigot. You also suggest somewhat snarkily that I belong to some unnamed group, and I have some religious beliefs or affiliations. Tis a puzzlement how you came by your knowledge and which groups you wish to ascribe my guilt by association.

              By my calling you out on these issues, you probably go with your standard response of ‘my bad’. I expressed myself poorly. I will try to do better next time. I am not buying it. Further, as I previously stated: “The thing about bigots, zealots, and fanatics is that without a life-changing experience, no argument or amount of diversity training is going to change their mind.” So I choose to no longer pursue this conversation further with you. Future conversations are not looking that great either.

              • It’s my fault that what I wrote could have been interpreted as implying that everyone who doesn’t approve of GSRN activity is motivated by malice. (That, I gather, is why no fewer than three different people objected to my use of the word “bigot”.) I took it for granted that people would know I don’t think all people who disapprove of GSRN activity are motivated by malice, and I apologize for not spelling that out more clearly. It’s the people who are motivated by malice who make people want to have pride parades, which is why I thought it would be a good idea to talk about them.

                That’s my honest feelings on the issue. I don’t take a stand on whether any particular person is motivated by malice because I like to take people at face value.

                • EC, regular EA readers and commenters have no truck with you or your comments as they are insightful, well organized, well argued, and persuasive. Not many take them as a personal rebuke and most have been gracious in their rejoinders, which is a compliment to our noble host who encourages spirited debate and commenters who are mindful that is an ethics blog and act accordingly.

                  “Bigot” though struck many as unfair, mine own self included, because the prevailing current windblowing position is that gay/lesbian orientation is preferred and exalted on them celebratory high altar of civilization and must
                  not openly be embraced but promoted to exclusion of all other orientations. Any detractor is a knuckle dragging mouth breathing moron.

                  It is little wonder that many have objected to being accused of bigotry. There is no sugar coating “bigotry”. None. A bigot is a moron and a Trumpster, but I repeat myself, right? A bigot is the enemy of freedom, right? A bigot has forfeited all right, title, and interest in the American experiment, right? The Woke and the Left say so. So, is it surprising that Bigotry Accused have responded with a raised middle finger in glorious tradition of the international symbol of contempt and pushed back.


                  • Thanks, jvb; I appreciate your kind words.

                    I just read Jack’s latest post about Sarah Spain, and now I think I understand more what you mean. The word “bigot” is being thrown around with so little regard for what it actually means that I might as well have said that people support Pride Month “because of all the fascists that gender/sexual/romantic nonconforming people have to put up with!” No wonder it sounded like a blanket accusation!

                    I’ll just have to find a different word to use when referring to actual bigotry, apparently. And that does include the practice of crying “bigotry” at any criticism of part of the “pro-GSRN” narrative. The people who brand all dissent as evil have become what they say they hate.

  3. It’s insulting to me that we have an entire month dedicated to celebrating homosexuality when veterans get nothing even close. At best, homosexuality is something to tolerate, but it’s not something we should celebrate as a positive good. I have a gay brother, and I’ve struggled deeply with the issue for a long time. I’m still not settled.

    Especially for gay men though, it can be harmful to the body and cause long term damage. Homosexuals shouldn’t be discriminated against in employment and such, but I still have trouble not seeing it as a disorder along the lines of people who are trans or anorexic or the like. The human mind can go wrong in weird ways, and it doesn’t even have to be the individual’s fault they suffer from a disorder.

    Veterans need way more celebration. We should celebrate people who have the highest ethics and do whats right even at the cost of their own lives. Duty over all else is way more admirable.

  4. Once upon a time, many years ago, when ordinary citizens could just walk into the Capitol without a ticket from the Visitor’s Center, I had some time to spend and visited it. No big thing.

    I must have gotten lost because I found myself outside Dick Army’s office in the House Side. He was kind enought to stop briefly to chat, and made a comment about how hard it was to deal with “The Enemy.” Much younger and more foolish at the time, I asked if that’s how he thought of Democrats? He chuckled, and said, “no, son. The Democrat’s are the opposition; it’s the Senate who are the enemy.” He went on to explain how a divided legislature creates a bottleneck, where the Senate simply fails to consider Bills sent over from the House.thinking about that in light of Jack’s #2, it occurs to me that, most times, Senators would have their hackles raised by any suggestion from a Rep that the Senate should change a rule to accommodate a House desire.if anything, I suspect that battle lines have hardened over 5he past 30 or 40 years to the point where there is no possibility of leadership negotiating any bipartisan compromise on anything.

    Just a thought,

    More Bill

  5. https://www.google.com/url?q=https://nypost.com/2022/06/01/marine-corps-sparks-outrage-with-pride-month-rainbow-bullets/&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwj00Imz3ZX4AhVVmYQIHZ2rD0IQFnoECAoQAg&usg=AOvVaw2_FOmRA23K6KhEa2yy-Dmx
    I’m surprised nobody has posted on this one yet (unless I missed it).
    I don’t WANT a month celebrating MY gender, or race, or sexual preferences, or ethnicity, or any other characteristics that aren’t the result of something I actually accomplished. Why should we be expected to cheer on, or even accept, this increasingly in-your-face demand that everyone else acknowledge some bogus “pride” claimed by one attention-seeking bunch of loud mouths after another? Screw them all: give us back our calendar!

      • Hah. Shows the age off the commentariat. No one names their kids William anymore. “Bill’s” use in naming kids is a relic of the ‘fifties.

        • Dear late Father (1925-2020), Great Grandfather (1850-1911), Great Great Grandfather (1817-1874), Great Great Great Great Great Great Grandfather** (1720-1785), Great Great Great Great Great Great Great Grandfather** (1688-1778): Williams all!

          **Born-n-died in Prince WILLIAM County, VA

          We’re doin’ our part; you’s don’t think my W stands for Wonderful, do you’s?

          Although it should…

        • I think you’re right about that, OB.

          I haven’t met many, if any, born after ’70, though it’s still supposed to be relatively popular.


          • Maybe the Brit royals will bring it back? They’ve brought back George into baby name popularity, against all odds. Until recently, George was less used than William. You’d think Crazy George would have retired the name, but I guess the current George would be George VIII.

  6. 1. We’ve become a society of little minorities ruling the roost. It’s annoying. The allegedly “marginalized” are “celebrated.” Frankly, I think these groups are in danger of overplaying their hand. People of color comprising thirteen percent of the population in the country want to run everything and be given everything. At some point there’s going to be racial reckoning all right. Supposedly there weren’t enough people of color in TV commercials and print advertising (other than McDonalds who always used black people and became really popular with people of color- was that a good thing?). Now there are hardly any white people to be found in commercials and ads. When did equality come to mean dominance?

    • Ah, but it’s not “equality” any more, is it?

      “Equity” is the new word to use. Sounds the same, easy to confuse with the other, but not the same.


  7. Apropos of not much of anything other than typical goings on in Democratic controlled cities, why are gang shoot outs outside bars in the early morning called “mass shootings?” These are gunfights conducted by gangs. Was it “The Mass Shooting at the OK Corral?”

  8. Wasn’t it the liberals who demanded that we stop committing people for mental illnesses? How’s that working out for you guys?

    • It was the Kennedy boys who started that after Joe, Sr. had their siter lobotomized for having premarital sex. Camelot, my ass.

  9. Enough of you telling us that school shootings are effective life when every other country like ours has virtually ended.

    This is a flat out lie.

    Brazil, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Russia, and South Africa have higher criminal homicide rates.

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 )

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.