“Have you no sense of decency? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?‘
With those deft, live-televised and well-timed (and planned in advance) words, lawyer Joseph Welch set off ethics alarms around the country that stripped the mask from Sen. Joe McCarthy and signaled the end of one of the ugliest episodes of political misconduct in American history. The Democratic Party is in the midst of another such episode of its own construction, but it’s doubtful that a Welch-like question would have any effect today. Nonetheless, the Democratic Party’s cynical and desperate manipulation of the brain-damaged (John Fetterman) and the elderly and senile (President Biden) to maintain its tenuous hold on power is an abandonment of decency arguably as disgusting and anti-Democratic as McCarthy’s smearing of political foes as Communists.
The party’s reduction of Senator Diane Feinstein, 90, once a sharp and professional Senator from California, but now a sick, mentally-diminished shell, to its marionette is particularly ugly. Last week, Feinstein relinquished the power of attorney to her daughter, a tacit admission that she was no longer competent to handle her own affairs. Yet she remains in a position that requires her to participate in decisions regarding the affairs of the United States, and its many millions of citizens. How could she be incapable of acting in her own interest but still qualified to do the job her constituents (foolishly) elected her to do? Obviously, she can’t.
Feinstein had already begun to display disturbing signs of age-related cognitive decline before a series of health issues sent her into medical earlier this year. She was missing from the Senate for months, and when she returned appeared frail and confused.
Since returning to Washington DC, she has appeared frail and has shown the public several alarming mental lapses. She should resign, of course, but may no longer have the requisite mental acuity to understand that she should resign. Her party, meanwhile, is perfectly satisfied to allow her to embarrass herself and scar her reputation as a distinguished public servant as long as she allows it to pull her strings so Democrats can maintain their filament-thin majority in the Senate.
The Democrats aren’t even attempting to hide their ruthless and cruel exploitation of Feinstein’s infirmity. In an interview with the L.A. Times, former Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer said Feinstein “can’t” resign because it would create a 10-10 stalemate on the Senate Judiciary Committee wher Feinstein currently serves (sort of), until after the 2024 election. Since Republicans have the votes to block putting another Democrat on the committee, Boxer feels it’s ethical to keep a confused, sick old woman there who will just vote as she’s told. See, it’s all the Republican’s fault. “I think it speaks volumes to their lack of humanity,” she says. Current Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), one of the most Machiavellian of Democrats, agrees, tweeting, “The fact is simple: if Senator Feinstein resigns, Mitch McConnell gets to decide whether Democrats have a Senate Judiciary majority.” The message, then, is that the party will make poor Feinstein roll out to deliver her programmed vote if it means she ends up like the dead movie producer in “Weekend at Bernie’s.”
It will surprise no one that Hillary Clinton agrees with the treatment of Feinstein, her supposed colleague and friend. “So what are we supposed to do?’ she told TIME. “All these people pushing her to retire: fine, we get no more judges? I don’t think that’s a good tradeoff.”
Funny: Emanuel Kant held that a human life must never be used for the benefit of another person, movement or group. That’s called a “Categorical Imperative.” In ethics, that’s what is considered a bad trade-off.
Ethics Alarms 
I’m thinking we should call the Biden presidency “Four Years at Joe’s.” Soon, Joe will be taken “water skiing” by Hunter and Dr. Jill. “Bonk! Bonk! Bonk!” They’ll make it a campaign commercial!
Ironically, I think Joe and Fetterman and Lucy Van Pelt above are simply holding down one end of the puppet bell curve. With few exceptions, all politicians are simply puppets whose strings are pulled by their professional political consultants. I’d hazard a guess that Rand Paul and Ted Cruz are among the very few politicians who actually think for themselves. Frankly, for better or worse, so does Donald Trump. In any event, Feinstein, Biden and Fetterman are simply symptomatic of the professionalization of electoral politics. The only way you get elected and stay in office is doing what your paid advisors tell you. Feinstein and Biden and Fetterman are just extreme examples but they’re no different that the rest. They are the archetype.
Or, you know, you negotiate moderate judges that both sides can live with. Or you horse-trade conservative judges for leftist judges, one-for-one. You know, the way rational people might act when handed a 50/50 power sharing situation.
Their paid professional campaign advisors won’t allow that, Dave. Not good for business.
And we have Harry Ried (may burn in hell forever) to thank for that. He was truly one of the most destructive political figures in US history. Between nuking the filibuster for judicial appointments (sans SCOTUS, which would’ve been merely a matter of time before it also happened) and torpedoing Romney with his blatant lies, no one else has cause more longer lasting damage to US politics
Don’t forget excessive use of ‘filling the tree’ and use of cloture votes to prevent debate. One of the problems with how people try to count filibusters is that a cloture vote can be abused and then gets blamed on the minority party for wanting some sort of input.
“Hillary Clinton agrees with the treatment of Feinstein, her supposed colleague and friend. “So what are we supposed to do?’ she told TIME. “All these people pushing her to retire: fine, we get no more judges? I don’t think that’s a good tradeoff.”
That statement alone is why people think the law is that which is meted out by those in power. Clinton’s comment comes right and says we don’t want impartial judges. Every day the media undermines the judicial branch when they mention who appointed the judge when reporting on a decision. That should be irrelevant. The only reason they use it is when they want to diminish their opposition. They seem to avoid the political label is when their favored judge rules against them.
I find the notion of equal justice under the law a fiction if laws can be unequally applied by prosecutors or interpreted by judges based on political orientation.
Why don’t the democrats retire her? She’s in a safe seat that they’ll have no problem filling with another Democrat…
Or are they worried?
Whom do they suspect Gavin Newsom would appoint to replace her?
I wondered the same thing, but it’s answered in the post:
“In an interview with the L.A. Times, former Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer said Feinstein “can’t” resign because it would create a 10-10 stalemate on the Senate Judiciary Committee where Feinstein currently serves (sort of), until after the 2024 election. Since Republicans have the votes to block putting another Democrat on the committee, Boxer feels it’s ethical to keep a confused, sick old woman there who will just vote as she’s told. …. Current Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), one of the most Machiavellian of Democrats, agrees, tweeting, ‘The fact is simple: if Senator Feinstein resigns, Mitch McConnell gets to decide whether Democrats have a Senate Judiciary majority.'”
Welp. Somehow missed an entire paragraph in my reading.
See- my speed reading classes are paying off. I can finish an entire book in an hour.
Just the comprehension plummets.
Incidents like this make me think of all the times atheists have asserted that you don’t need religion for morality. They assert that you can come up with the same moral framework we have today without the need for religion, especially Christianity. However, when you ask “Why is human life especially valuable?”, there isn’t a rational answer. Rationally, a human life is worth what you can get for it on the free market (just ask Planned Parenthood). The idea that there is a ‘special’ worth to human life comes from God.
There are other cultural things under attack that come from Christianity as well. Let’s look at freedom of speech, the press, and religion. It isn’t like these concepts are common in the world, in fact, they are pretty rare in the world (OK, the Mongols were fine with freedom of religion). Why did we develop such concepts? I would say they are a reasonable outcome of the Protestant Reformation. At the beginning of the Protestant Reformation, you could get into a lot of trouble for saying the wrong thing, printing the wrong thing, or being the wrong religion. The futility of forcing these things on everyone in Europe eventually became accepted and this grew into tolerance of other ideas (religious ideas being the most violently protected ideas).
As Christianity wanes in the US, so do the Christian values that are enshrined in our ‘rights’ as Americans. The Democrats will not stop abusing people because there is no rational reason NOT to. If they have to abuse people to get what they want, that is the rational thing to do. Refusing to abuse people to your detriment is not rational, you can only justify it with an appeal to an authority higher than reason.
There’s always talk of post-Christian civilization. Like the logical progression was tribalistic-paganism becomes Christian becomes post Christian.
No, there is no tripartite division of progress. You have:
1) pagan tribalism
2) Judeo-Christianity
3) pagan tribalism