I had been torn over whether to see “Nyad,” the acclaimed 2023 biopic about distance swimmer Diane Nyad’s quest to complete the first “unassisted swim” from Cuba to Florida. On the pro- side was that the two stars, Annette Bening and Jodie Foster are among my favorite actresses in Hollywood. On the anti- side is my long-time problems with Nyad herself, so I thought the movie might drive me crazy. I also suspected that the critical raves were based more on the progressive movie reviewer mob’s determination to extol a movie about a lesbian couple than the actual quality of the film.
It is an ethics movie, however, so last night I finally viewed it on Netflix. As I expected, both Bening and Foster are excellent, but Bening more than Foster: Jodie plays Nyad’s galpal pretty much like she’s Jodie Foster. Hardly a stretch. Bening, in contrast, is doing one of those against-type portrayals requiring a dramatic physical transformation that is always irresistible to critics and Oscar voters, like Robert DeNiro playing Jake Lamotta, or Chalize Theron playing serial killer Aileen Woronos.
It’s a stunt and not a completely successful one: the real Nyad was and is a beefy mesomorphic athlete, and Bening, despite filling out her usual long and lean frame a bit, doesn’t look like either a swimmer or an athlete. She is ultimately convincing, however, nonetheless. She also plays Nyad as a self-obsessed, narcissistic jerk, which she is.
There have been three Crocketts elected to Congress in U.S. history (one of theme was Davy), and to say that the current Crockett, Jasmine, is the worst pf the trio and a blight on both the House of Representatives and the House of Crockett is an understatement.
In fairness to Matt Gaetz, I need to catch Ethics Alarms up on one of the most revolting members of Congress on the other side of the aisle, Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Tx), a proud Dunning-Kruger victim, one of those people with a law degree who is under the delusion that critical thinking skills come with a J.D. I don’t know how she got admitted to law school and I don’t know how she graduated, but few members of Congress have said so many offensive and stupid things in so short a period time: she only was elected in 2022.
The House Ethics Committee report on former Rep. Matt Gaetz was released today and concluded that there was “substantial evidence” that the recently resigned Florida Congressman paid many women, including at least one minor, to have sex with him, in addition to his likely violating House Rules and other standards of conduct “prohibiting prostitution, statutory rape, illicit drug use, impermissible gifts, special favors or privileges, and obstruction of Congress.” The 37-page Committee Report is here. Read it and weep, as the saying goes.
Gaetz is clearly what is technically called “a sleazeball,” but we knew that, didn’t we? I found it particularly notable that he wasn’t even defended by his own party, which is what we usually see in the “dissents” in such ethics reports. Gaetz’s defenders on the committee only objected to the report being released despite its subject’s leaving the House, which is not the typical course but is not unprecedented either. The report’s dissenters even goes to the trouble of admitting that they have no objections to the report’s conclusions.
The report was published in full by the House Ethics Committee on Monday morning after the panel secretly voted earlier this month to release it. Gaetz, was investigated for four years by the committee over various allegations.
Of course Gaetz has denied doing anything illegal, while admitting that he was just a wild and crazy guy in his younger days. Lying is small change for someone who has engaged in the conduct described in the report. It does appear that the statutory rape episode was the result of him not knowing how old his sex partner was, which is understandable since he appears to have run through sex partners like they were Tic-Tacs. The committee’s report found that Gaetz had also engaged in more typical ethics violations like accepting gifts in “excess of permissible amounts,” including a trip to the Bahamas in 2018. Even then he “engaged in sexual activity” with at least four women on the trip, giving them money as “gifts.”
The report also alleges that there was “sufficient evidence of Representative Gaetz’s intent to derail the investigation.”
“I am sure someone will do research into who the order has spared, and we will see other multiple murderers, people who killed without remorse and with extreme cruelty, vicious psychopaths who killed for the fun of it, or who murdered children, or who slaughtered their victims after rape or torture. These don’t warrant executions, Biden says on behalf of the Wonderful Woke who refuse to acknowledge that there is a point where an individual has forfeited the benefits of civilization, but the single factor of “hate” elevates murder from really, really bad to intolerable.”
No sooner had I posted than Not The Bee posted exactly what I expected; it popped up in my email, in fact. Among those the President’s mass commutation today saves from the fate they all richly deserve:
As was anticipated after reports that were issued over the weekend, “President Joe Biden announced” today that he has commuted the sentences of 37 convicted murderers, thus taking them off federal death row. They will now serve out life sentences in prison, being housed, fed, given medical attention and more at taxpayer expense. This was done deliberately to foil the announced intention of President-elect Donald Trump to carry out the verdicts of juries and the courts.
“Biden’s statement”—this is in quotation marks because he didn’t write it, probably doesn’t understand it and quite possibly never read it or approved it—reads,
“Today, I am commuting the sentences of 37 of the 40 individuals on federal death row to life sentences without the possibility of parole. These commutations are consistent with the moratorium my Administration has imposed on federal executions, in cases other than terrorism and hate-motivated mass murder.Make no mistake: I condemn these murderers, grieve for the victims of their despicable acts, and ache for all the families who have suffered unimaginable and irreparable loss. But guided by my conscience and my experience as a public defender, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Vice President, and now President, I am more convinced than ever that we must stop the use of the death penalty at the federal level. In good conscience, I cannot stand back and let a new administration resume executions that I halted.”
Above you will see three interpretations of what angels—you know, those benign, heavenly creatures we hear on high and observe, “Hark! They sing!,” the celestial guardians like the funny little old man who shows Jimmy Stewart that he’s really led a wonderful life, the kind of immortal being that appeared to Mary to tell her she was going to bear the Son of God, you know, those things?—really look like. The version on the left is from the Mike Flanagan horror series “Midnight Mass.” It’s a scary angel, but not as scary as the ones that show up in Robert and Michelle King’s scary TV series “Evil,” which look like this…
Yikes.
The version of Gabriel in the center is pretty much how I had been taught and told and shown how angels look for most of my life, and I assumed that was how they are represented in the Bible. Now, this is at least partially my own fault for not knowing the Bible better than I do, but when artists, churches, Sunday school teachers, movies, tree ornaments, Christmas cards and children’s books all show angels as friendly-looking Scandinavians with big, white, fluffy wings, I think I can be excused for assuming that there is at least as much authority for those representations as there is for anything else in the Bible—-an assertion to which Carnac the Magnificent (oh, look it up, ye of pop culture deficit!) would say to me, “You are wrong, Ethics Breath!”
I. Rep. David Scott (D-Ga.), 79, was being wheeled into the House by a staffer when Politico photographer Francis Chung took his picture. Punchbowl News reports that the Congressman screamed, “Who gave you the right to take my picture, asshole?” Nice! The First Amendment gives him the right. Scott was in full public view, and has no expectation of privacy. He doesn’t know that? Why is anyone in Congress who doesn’t understand Bill of Rights 101? Scott has served as the U.S. representative of Georgia’s 13th congressional district since 2003. How can he not know this after 20 years in Congress? Did he once know it and somehow forgot? That seems plausible. Scott has chaired the House Agriculture Committee since January 2021, but colleagues in the House have expressed, all anonymously, of course, concerns about his fading mental abilities. They say he often reads from a script and has “trouble” discussing finer points of policy. Scott also frequently leaves Agriculture Committee meetings and does not return, even though he’s the chairman.
Sarah B.’s perceptive and eloquent Comment of the Day about the inquirer to the NYT’s “The Ethicist” advice column who asked whether the threat of various catastrophes ahead (as she saw them) concluded with a sentence that reminded me of this famous speech from the film “Parenthood.” I’ve been looking for an opportunity to post it. Thanks Sarah B.
It is very easy to mock and deride someone who is silly enough to believe the mainstream media and all the horror stories the left has subscribed to. I like feeling superior for not believing in this version of fantasy land. I felt superior when I was not one of the wackos who declared themselves part of the Navi in Avatar, and I’m feeling the same general happiness when recognizing that I’m not so far gone as to believe this current set of beliefs. Indeed, it is tempting to feel even more so, because so many of my contemporaries follow this insane set of beliefs.
However, I think we need to dig deeper than the mocking laughter this letter so easily inspires. What is this woman really saying? First, she is discussing a desire to have children. This is a desire that fewer and fewer women are subscribing to, usually to their and to societies eventual sadness. Therefore, this desire should be encouraged. Second, she is fearing that we are entering a time of tribulation. Before addressing this in any depth, we should consider what she is probably meaning with these two concerns. The first worry is likely that she feels that bringing a child into this world in a time of trouble means that her child may suffer. The second worry is that in bring a child into this world in a time of trouble would cause this woman to suffer.
The concern of bringing a child into a world in a less than perfect time causing the child to suffer is not a valid one for several reasons. First, the USA, under Trump or not, is better than many if not most places in the world. In addition, the world in 2024 is a better place than nearly all of human history. Less people suffer, and they suffer less than in the past. The human misery index is very low. Children are a joy to the human race, and the hope for the future. Man has always had children, even in tougher times than any we can illogically expect to come about today. The idea that the child MIGHT suffer in the perfect storm is still less likely than the child having a normal life and enjoying every moment his parents lovingly gifted him. Besides, in the best of times, a child will get illnesses and injuries. That is part of growing up. To quote Calvin, quoting his dad, “being miserable builds character.” As some say, if it were not for the heat or the hammer, the steel could not be honed. Adversity is what helps us become the best version of ourselves.
The concern of a parent suffering because they brought a child into a troubled world is ridiculous, because parents will always suffer for their children. Labor is no picnic. Sleepless nights when breastfeeding are a form of suffering. Staying up with a sick kid, or sitting by a kid’s bedside when they are in the hospital for a tonsillectomy, appendectomy, or croup is not exactly enjoyable. Holding them still so a doctor can give them stitches is incredibly painful, even before they kick you. I certainly feel greater pain than my children when they are sick and in misery and I wish I could take their suffering from them, even if it is a good suffering. Heck, it really does hurt me more than my child when I have to discipline them. And again, in the perfect utopia of a Democratic paradise, a child will still cause their parents suffering. Children will be born with special needs. Children will slip past an exhausted or distracted parent and fall into a pool or run into traffic. Accidents will happen, no matter what we do. Also, children will grow up and make poor decisions that cause parents all kinds of heartbreak. (I could mention that many democratic policies make some of those decisions more likely, but that would be of little use talking with this woman.) In short, being a parent is accepting suffering in the course of bring joy to ourselves and others.
My final thoughts on this involve a song by Garth Brooks. “Our lives are better left to chance. I could have missed the pain, but I’d have had to miss the dance.” Today, too many people have become convinced that no dance is worth the pain we may have to suffer, especially if we only imagine what the pain may be. I choose the dance.
As frequent readers here know, Ethics Alarms has been referring to the Axis of Unethical Conduct (an Ethics Alarms term, and a fair one) as a totalitarianism-leaning, anti-American phenomenon for years now, as I have tracked the frightening progress on the 2016 Ethics Train Wreck and all of its many offshoots. I have used made this point frequently and, I recognize, emphatically to the point that many object to those and related labels as inflammatory and biased, which they are not because my assessment is objective and accurate. I could also say, with justification, “If the show fits, wear it,” and even “If the shoe fits wear it, you assholes.”
Today I was sent promotional spam by my old hometown newspaper, the lone surviving conservative #2 paper in Boston (The Dominating Axis representative is the always Democratic Boston Globe) after the slow amalgam of four newspapers with long histories of service to the people of New England: The Boston Herald, the Boston Traveler, the Boston Record and the Boston American. That headline above was all I needed to spark a head explosion with several subsequent explosions that left bits of brain and bone on my keyboard and computer screen after I read the entire report.
I came so close to not finishing this pathetic lament from someone who has been lied, gaslighted and manipulated to the edge of madness. I’m not going to even bother to read Prof. Appiah’s answer: I thought he had finally stopped picking crazy Trump Derangement inquiries for his weekly column to pander to the Grey Lady’s warped reader base, but he’s back at it with this one.
