Embarrassing and hyper-partisan as it was, Senator Whitehouse’s rant on the Senate floor last week was not entirely without its valid points. He is right that the U.S. Supreme Court has been having too many ethics breakdowns (the leaking of Justice Alito’s draft of the Dobbs opinion was one of them) and as I noted in the EA piece, (AGAIN) there is no defending Clarence Thomas. He is not, however, the only Justice with some ‘splainin’ to do, as Ricky so often said to Lucy.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson published a memoir shortly after being placed on the Supreme Court as a DEI coup, though she hadn’t really done anything to justify such an ego trip. “Lovely One” is now going for half-price on Amazon, but Jackson received a $893,750 advance for the book reported $2 million in profits last year. Since there is no indication that the memoir is flying off the shelves, the numbers are puzzling. Penguin Random House will soon be publishing Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s book and it paid her a $2 million advance. Why? The majority of the country can’t name a single Supreme Court justice, but the ones who are willing to cash in are receiving celebrity level book advances. [Full disclosure: the book I co-authored with Ed Larson was also published by Random House, in 2007. We received approximately $6.78 each as our advance…okay, a bit more than that.]
Video has “surfaced”—where do these surfaced videos go to, before they surface?—of Los Angeles’s incompetent, smug, ridiculous mayor Karen Bass answering a question about her city’s ICE riots by replying that “they never happened.” See?
How do politicians like Bass keep getting away with this? Democrats during the Biden Administration set new records for “It isn’t what it is” gaslighting. The border was secure. Inflation wasn’t really excessive. Men who declared themselves women while keeping all their junk were…POOF!…women. Joe Biden was “sharp as a tack.” War is Peace. Oops, sorry, that last one was Big Brother. How does Bass and her party live with themselves? How can they look themselves in the mirror? Why do Democrats tolerate it?
Have they no sense of decency, at long last? Have they left no sense of decency?
Apparently not, or they would be hiding their heads under paper bags.
[Of course, it helps that virtually no Axis news sources have reported on the video. But we know that journalists have no sense of decency…]
This has been a continuing topic on Ethics Alarms: the longest-running EA post in terms of comments is this one, about the too-often quoted Dogsbite.org. Today’s hysterical purveyor of anti-pit bull propaganda is the conservative site Not the Bee, which I occasionally find useful as a resource but which is marred by ethically dubious commentary as often as not. It already made Ethics Alarms with an earlier pit bull bigotry post, in 2024.
The current post begins, “So are we allowed to talk honestly about this problem yet or nah?” My answer is “nah” if the “problem” is the alleged natural viciousness of pit bulls and the “we” are people like the author who obviously don’t know what they are talking about. A one-year-old girl was attacked and killed by the family dog which all news sources are calling a “pit bull.” A tragedy, of course, but Not The Bee posts this chart, from another incompetent site which took it from (Gee, what a surprise) Dogsbite.org.:
Whitehouse is Little Rhodey’s senior U.S. Senator, Democrat of course, and his speech this week on the Senate floor (several members had to be hospitalized after they rolled their eyes too hard) was reflexively praised by “The Nation,” which employs far, far, FAR left lunatic Elie Mystal as an editor.
[Digression: You remember Elie, don’t you? He can only appear in public now on MSNBC without being chased by men in white coats carrying butterfly nets. He was too extreme for the left-biased legal gossip rag “Above the Law,” which published his radical nonsense before he went completely bonkers. Elie has opined that all black jurors should always vote to acquit black defendants no matter hwo guilty they are. Nice. (I wonder what the ABA would say if juries paid any attention to him?) More recently he called for foreign nations to issue sanctions against the U.S.]
Read it. Or at least try. I dare you. I double dare you. First, it is garbled, rambling and incoherent (not unlike this), perhaps not quite Authentic Frontier Gibberish, but too close to be tolerated from a U.S. Senator. Second, and this has always been true of his rants, Whiethouse obviously doesn’t understand climate change science at all, like all hysterics who want the U.S. to spend trillions and cripple the economy based on speculation. This country can’t slow down climate change, whatever it is, without the vast majority of the world joining in and they won’t, don’t and can’t. This includes giant countries India and China. Does Whitehouse really not comprehend this, or is he just pimping for a world dictatorship? Oh, who knows? There is no justification for paying any attention to him, ever.
Whitehouse has, for example, repeatedly said that Americans who oppose the climate change “consensus” should be imprisoned. To this, law professor/pundit Glenn Reynolds responded,
“First, this man should be voted out of office as soon as human possible. His ignorance is dangerous. Second, the state bar should require him to undergo at least 100 hours of mandatory continuing legal education on the subject of constitutional law, with emphasis on the First Amendment. Newsflash: joining together to discuss common interests and even–gasp!–funding research, white papers and lobbying efforts to advance one’s perspectives on an issue isn’t illegal; its free speech.”
It should be no surprise that Whitehouse implies that the Texas flood is the result of evil Republicans and Donald Trump not caring about our planet slowly burning up, though there is no evidence of the tragedy being caused by climate change (or DOGE cuts). [Added] I just saw this…
🚨SHOCK POLL: CNN admits that the American people AREN'T CONCERNED about climate change — Radical activists FAILED to scare citizens.
"Americans AREN'T afraid of climate change!"
"Climate activists have not successfully made the case to the American people!" pic.twitter.com/47u9IzQ8IF
But he has other villains to finger: “dark money” that elects those evil Republicans (funny, getting far more money in donations than Donald Trump didn’t seem to help Kamala Harris any); “creepy billionaires,” and a “captured Supreme Court.” In fact, I can’t let this pass; here is that part of the rant:
Former President Biden’s White House physician, Kevin O’Connor, refused to answer questions for the House Oversight Committee’s investigation into the White House and Democratic cover-up of Biden’s mental decline and disability. News accounts from the Axis keep stating that Biden’s condition and a cover-up are “alleged” only, but res ipsa loquitur: what we already know, have witnessed and heard tells us all we need to know except the who, how, and how long. Biden was (is ) suffering from dementia of one kind or another. His condition was carefully, if insufficiently, hidden from the public. The fact that his power had to be exercised by unelected figures using the President as their agent, puppet or beard constitutes at least as great a scandal as Watergate, and perhaps a more substantial attack on our democracy.
This betrayal of the public trust requires at least as thorough an investigation as that definitive scandal in the Nixon White House received. Democrats, however, unlike the Republicans of the Watergate era, are refusing to do their duty and assist in the inquiry, probably because they have metaphorical blood on their hands. They were complicit. They were guilty. The House inquiry includes questions about whether Biden’s staff used the autopen to illegally carry out official actions in Biden’s name. One would think both Democrats and Republicans would be concerned about this. Apparently not. Make of that what you will.
The past four days have been extended chaos on all fronts, so maybe that explains the inattentiveness that resulting in my running out gas in traffic for the first time in more than thirty years. It was raining lightly, I had groceries in the car, and there was nothing to do but turn on my flashers and wave the cars behind me into the next lane. Meanwhile my passenger and current house guest volunteered to walk down Glebe Road in Arlington, Va., to the nearest gas station, which wasn’t all that near.
Of the approximately 100 vehicles that passed, exactly two drivers paid any attention to my plight at all. One was a concerned Hispanic woman with an equally concerned child of about 8, but before her inquiry a young man had pulled over, rolled down his window and asked, “Need help?” I began, “There’s a bald guy walking to get me some gas…” and he said, “Got it!” then sped away.
In about 30 minutes my friend hopped out of the stranger’s car. The young man had picked my freind up, taken him to two gas stations (the first had no gas cans), waited for my freind to fill a gallon plastic water bottle with gasoline as the stranger fashioned a make-shift funnel out of a soda bottle, and driven him back to the site of my humiliation, where my tank was duly filled sufficiently to get me to a station. My friend told me that the Good Samaritan was a military officer, a devout Christian, and one hell of a nice guy.
Begining with Batson v. Kentucky, 476 US. 79 (1986), trial lawyers in both criminal and civil cases have been officially forbidden from exercising peremptory challenges to potential jurors based on the prospective juror’s race or gender on the theory that this violates prospective jurors’ equal protection rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. It was a utopian ruling and grandstanding by the Supreme Court in deliberate defiance of the Sixth Amendment right of citizens to a fair trial as well as contradictory to the legal profession’s duty of zealous representation.
The majority in Batson fantasized that in many cases racial or gender bias, positive or negative, is will be likely based on the jurors’ characteristics alone. There is a scene in “Airplane! II” where a man on trial for abusing his ex-wive, and all of the jurors are women nursing babies. The film came out a few years before Batson. Courts have permitted lawyers to strike jurors based on a prospective juror’s age, marital status, disability, or socioeconomic status, but especially since the infection of critical race theory and the destruction of race relations initiated by Barack Obama, the fact that an attorney can’t decide in a particular case that he wants as few blacks/whites/ women men as possible without risking a verdict being overturned or being subjected to a disciplinary complaint is one more way progressives have managed to distort the rule of law.
So, naturally, the American Bar Association, having now become a full member of the Axis of Unethical Conduct, has decided to bolster the Batson decision, which really needs to be ove-turned, For this it relies on its controversial and arguably unconstitutional Model Rule 8.4 (g) (which Ethics Alarms has been discussing for years), which reads,
“It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to engage in conduct that the lawyer knows or reasonably should know is harassment or discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status or socioeconomic status in conduct related to the practice of law. This paragraph does not limit the ability of a lawyer to accept decline or withdraw from a representation in accordance with Rule 1.16. This paragraph does not preclude legitimate advice or advocacy consistent with these Rules.”
It’s a really bad rule, vague and insidious, which is why only a minority of states have adopted it and why some courts struck it down when their state bars tried. How can any lawyer, or anybody at all, “know” what kind of conduct is going to be found discriminatory today, when, for example, criticizing an incompetent Presidential candidate for sounding like a vaudevillian’s doubletalk routine is likely to be called “racist”? (I’m sorry to keep picking on poor Kamala, but I didn’t nominate her…). But the ABA is now more devoted to the woke overhaul of society than it is law or ethics—see this recent post–so ABA Formal Ethics Opinion 517 was inevitable. The only mystery is what took the ABA so long.
The “Bite Me!”is an Ethics Alarms designation reserved for either an individual whose “response to being bullied, pressured and threatened into submissiveness is to say, “Do your worst. I believe in what I am doing, and I don’t grovel to mobs,” or as used several times here, to impugn the author of unethical conduct that demands the response, “Bite me!”
Dr. Kirsten Viola Harrison is a licensed psychologist and a “spiritual integration coach,” whatever the hell THAT means. She’s seeking her 15 minutes of faux fame by lecturing us about how people can unwittingly give off an “unapproachable energy,” thus sending out a “bad vibe.”
“Giving off a bad vibe’ means unintentionally projecting energy, through words, tone and body language, that others perceive as negative, inauthentic, or that make one appear unapproachable,” she explains. “It often triggers discomfort and mistrust, even when no harm is intended. Since our brains are wired to detect dissonance between what someone says and how they say it, the non-verbal signals which inform our emotional responses are exceedingly influential and powerful in shaping our interactions.”
Dr. Harrison has identified nine phrases she says can create these bad vibes if one isn’t careful. Gee, I wonder if “Bite me, you insufferable, over-credentialed fool!” is on the list? In her case, the “Bite Me!” is earned by abuse of authority and making gullible people stupid with New Age psychobabble. Here is her list, and my reactions.
Hmmmm. Well THAT certainly enhances my trust in my bank!
As I told the Wells Fargo customer service agent (“second line!”) when I finally got through to one, I don’t need this. My wife’s sudden death put me in financial hell, punched my business in the metaphorical solar plexus, and sent me on a harrowing odyssey to repair my economic state—debts, credit, taxes—regarding problems I didn’t even know existed. Messages from my bank telling me I am over my credit limit causes my adrenaline level to shoot through the top of my head. Yes, a home repair financing arrangement required me today to employ a new credit card for the full amount: I thought that’s what it was for. Silly me. Foolishly, I didn’t realize that charging $8,000 for an $8000 purchase on a credit card with an $8,000 credit limit would cause me to go over that credit limit.
But I’ve never been good at such matters.
When I called Wells Fargo and asked why I had been sent that alert, I was told that they had no idea. Just fooling around, I guess. Just screwing with me. “I’m sorry. I guess the computer just sent the wrong email,” was the best I got.
Oh.
I pulled my accounts out of Wells Fargo during their last scandal, and came back when I discerned that they were no longer crooked there. Now they’re just stupid and incompetent.
Ethics Alarms 