Dinner Bell Ethics Appetizers, 9/29/2022: Indigestion Edition

The post about Aaron Judge’s quest to be the American League’s record-holder for home runs in a season sparked some interesting baseball reflections in the comments, but I fell down on the job: yesterday marked the date in 1941 that Ted Williams became the last of the .400 hitters (whoever wins the AL batting championship this season will probably be under .320). And it’s a real ethics story! Told that his average, just under .400 but with enough past the decimal to be rounded up to the magic number in the record book, Ted was advised by his manager, Joe Cronin, to sit out the doubleheader that would close the season. Williams, in a famous demonstration of integrity (Ted was always an integrity stickler) insisted that he wouldn’t “back in” to a .400 average, and risked a place in history by playing in both games, though they were meaningless in the standings. With the same determination that allowed him to homer, as he had promised, in his final at bat in 1960, Ted got six hits in eight at-bats during the two games in Philadelphia, boosting his average to .406.

1. This is hard to digest: YouTube has demonetized a supercut video of Democrats claiming that Donald Trump’s 2016 victory was “stolen” or not “legitimate,” claiming that it “isn’t suitable for all advertisers” and “as a result, it will continue to run limited or no ads.” In fact, the video is not misleading in any way; it just shows the utter hypocrisy of the current Democratic Party’s condemnation of “election denial.” Here’s the video:

I remember all of this; its real significance is the degree to which Big Tech is determined to cover for the Left’s hypocrisy. Donald Trump’s entire four years in office were crippled by the effort by the “Axis of Unethical Conduct” to paint him as being elected by a diabolical alliance with Russia; it harmed the nation, our democracy, divided the country and directly seeded the current political chaos. These people should be ethically estopped from attacking Trump’s claims that the 2020 election was “rigged;” I can, but they can’t. Literally, they started it (and Trump has a better case than the Democrats ever did.)

YouTube election misinformation policies prohibit users from posting “misleading or deceptive content with serious risk of egregious harm” and “content interfering with democratic processes.” Videos that advance “false claims that widespread fraud, errors, or glitches occurred in certain past certified national elections” as well as “content that claims that the certified results of those elections were false.” That video doesn’t do any of these things. It just properly exposes Google/YouTube’s political allies, who deserve to be exposed.

2. I also am having trouble keeping this down…Stacey Abrams, now running again for Governor of Georgia, is a proven liar. Just as she denied that she was behind Major League Baseball pulling its All-Star Game from Atlanta last year once the deed was done and the move had harmed hundreds of small businesses, she is now claiming that she didn’t deny that she had lost her previous race with now-Governor Brian Kemp, though she never conceded. Washington Post “Fact-Checker” Glenn Kessler (he tries not to be a partisan hack; he just fails repeatedly) found that “a review of numerous interviews shows that Abrams subsequently used language denying the outcome of the election that she now appears to be trying to play down.”

So she’s now lying outright again. This is supposed to result in a “Four Pinocchios” rating, but there is no rating at all. Ann Althouse seems to think this is a mystery. The very first comment on her post points to the obvious answer: “Why ask why? Everyone knows why.”

3. That same answer also explains this Post article: “7 ways a recession could be good for you financially.” Yes, they really are that desperate. Soon to come: “Five Ways The Crime Wave Will Make Things Better;” “Ten Ways Open Borders Are Good For Your Family,” and “Why Suppression of Free Speech Makes Us Safer.”

4. I mean, they are so desperate they are even telling the truth about their real totalitarian desires…Read this astounding column by Politico’s founding editor John Harris: “The Best Way To Save The Constitution From Donald Trump Is To Rewrite It.” I’m not sure if the most scary thing is that he’s willing to say the secret part out loud—that the Left wants a totalitarian government because it’s the only way it can remake the United States into the non-United States model it demands—or that people like Harris are convinced that enough Americans will support the idea. i was going to fisk the whole, odious mess, but this paragraph tells you all you need to know:

Correcting or circumventing what progressives reasonably perceive as the infirmities of the Constitution, in fact, seems likely to be the preeminent liberal objective of the next generation. Progress on issues ranging from climate change to ensuring that technology giants act in the public interest will hinge on creating a new constitutional consensus. Trying to place more sympathetic justices on the Supreme Court is not likely to be a fully adequate remedy. There are more fundamental challenges embedded in the document itself — in particular the outsized power it gives to states, at a time when the most urgent problems and most credible remedies are national in character.

We have already been seeing what Democrats mean by “circumventing the Constitution.” The quixotic progressive obsession with climate change requires near-dictatorial powers on a global basis. “Ensuring that technology giants act in the public interest” is a veiled way to endorse government-supported censorship of opposing views that threaten the “greater good.” Harris also vaguely threatens civil war if conservatives don’t agree to gut the Constitution so the good, smart, clearly right people—you know, like him—gain unshakable control over the rest of us. “Conflict, improvisation, good luck — likely all three will be required for the country to survive the coming constitutional showdown.”

I’m sure he agrees that the President condemning all opposition as fascist and a threat to democracy is essential to the plan.

These are scary people.

Don’t underestimate them.

6 thoughts on “Dinner Bell Ethics Appetizers, 9/29/2022: Indigestion Edition

  1. “These are scary people.
    Don’t underestimate them.”

    I have been out front with that notion for quite some time now.
    Just waiting for others to figure it out and wondering if enough moderate dems ever will.

  2. “…most credible remedies are national in character.”

    Now THERE’S a howler! Please, John, name a single problem that the federal government has successfully tackled in, oh, the past forty years or so. I’ll wait…

    • Jim
      Not only has the Federal government been inept at most initiatives the statement that credible remedies are national in character is far more reminiscent of German nationalism of the 30’s than anything Trump proposed.

      • Since John Harris is a white guy, his call for one-party “national solutions” must make him one of those White Nationalists that we’re told are the main threat to the country.

  3. [2.] “content interfering with democratic processes.”

    …There’s that ol’ YouTube again, always wanting us content interfering with Democratic processes.

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.