“bias makes you stupid”

The President’s “60 Minutes” Interview

/ Jack Marshall / 6 Comments

President Trump sat down for a full interview with “60 Minutes” yesterday, and was grilled by CBS correspondent Norah O’Donnell (as I was once, though not on that show). The transcript and the video are here. Under the new regime of CBS News Czar (“Editor-in-Chief”) Bari Weiss, there were no deceptively edited sections as in the infamous and unethical (and, I believe, illegal) Kamala Harris interview a year ago when the network switched around her responses to try to deceive voters into believing that the Democrat isn’t, you know, a babbling idiot.

This post’s purpose isn’t to critique O’Donnell’s questions. She was appropriately respectful, aggressive and professional except that her facial expressions conveyed her hostility, which is unprofessional but now common practice among Axis broadcast journalists. The shot above was typical: she looked at the President of the United States as if he were a six-foot talking cockroach. Nor am I going to praise or criticize the substance of Trump’s responses, though I note that he showed an excellent knowledge of American Presidential history when he pronounced Joe Biden as our Worst President Ever.

It is simply to point out that the Trump Derangement narrative that this President is mentally failing and as cognitively disabled as Joe Biden (“Just in a different way” as one sufferer told me on Halloween) is either delusional or deliberately dishonest. The interview was slam-dunk proof of that, and yet this slander/libel is Axis cant now. I regard the claim as evidence of a genuine disruption of thinking ability. Bias makes you stupid, and in this case, bias is making these poor people ridiculous.

Continue reading →

‘Bias Makes You Stupid’ (And Untrustworthy) Case Study: Jonathan Chait

/ Jack Marshall / 22 Comments

Oh dear. So disheartening.

Jonathan Chait is a policy analyst and pundit who has, in the course of only writing for progressive and Axis publications and offering opinions on similar platforms in the broadcast news realm, has shown himself capable of principled disagreement with his party (guess which) and progressive cant. On the other hand, he is Trump Deranged, as he demonstrated the last time I criticized him. Then he wrote regarding the first stupid “No Kings” protest in June, “The No Kings protests appear to be a massive success.” (My comment: “Success at what?“) But Chait is clearly intelligent and capable of perceptive analysis, which is why the tweet above is so disturbing aside from the fact that it forces me to again think about Karine Jean-Pierre.

She’s on a book tour hyping her memoir of looking like a fool almost every day as Joe Biden’s paid liar for two years, “Independent: A Look Inside a Broken White House, Outside the Party Lines.” Jean-Pierre describes what she considers the Democratic Party’s betrayal of Joe Biden: “I watched Democratic leadership abandon, and in the end betray, a man who’d led our country through a pandemic and a time of historic political turmoil,” she writes.

Jean-Pierre’s gimmick is that she claims to be so outraged that the party pushed Biden to step aside as the Presidential nominee after his Presidential debate meltdown against Donald Trump, and that it “couldn’t articulate the achievements of the Biden/Harris administration well enough” that she has decided to leave the Democratic Party and become a political independent.

Talk about chutzpah: this woman is estopped from complaining about anyone’s failure to articulate anything.

Continue reading →

Unethical Rant of the Year: MSNBC Left-Wing Propagandist Lawrence O’Donnell

/ Jack Marshall / 7 Comments

Nah, there’s no mainstream media bias! Lawrence O’Donnell, right up there with the most shameless Axis media hacks in captivity even compared to the rest of MSNBC, usually goes his merry way slamming Republicans, conservatives and President Trump, avoiding inconvenient facts, objectivity and balance at all costs, appealing only to American who don’t want news or fair analysis, just confirmation of their own world view. When people decry the harsh division in American society today, O’Donnell is one of the prime villains, in part because he has been championing “advocacy journalism” ( as in unethical journalism) for so long.

Here’s his Ethics Alarms dossier. The last time I bothered to mention him at all (he’s always biased and unethical: The Julie Principle applies), was last year when I elevated him from mere Unethical Broadcast Journalist to Ethics Corrupter. Yes, I defended O’Donnell once…for being caught on video screaming at the MSNBC staff and shouting “fuck” among other epithets. I don’t think anyone’s most embarrassing private moments should be made “viral.”

However, this time attention should be paid, as Willy Loman’s widow says at the end of “Death of a Salesman.” O’Donnell snapped on the air yesterday and began denigrating Scott Jennings, the articulate, restrained token conservative and Donald Trump advocate on CNN’s on-air team. Jennings does a superb job vivisecting the usually emotional, knee-jerk, woke Trump-Deranged fury that he encounters on the various panels and in the numerous discussions he participates in, providing a much-needed counterpoint on CNN, which has evolved into MSNBC lite: reliably unethically biased, but with occasional outbreaks of non-partisan reality.

For some reason a sole voice of non-Axis perspective on a rival network is deeply offensive to O’Donnell. How dare Jennings defend President Trump? How dare he undermine the perpetual efforts of the news media to destroy him and defeat his policies? The Unethical Rant of 2025 was the result. Here is the whole amazing thing:

Continue reading →

Ethics Hero: Bill Gates, Who Finally Figured Out That Climate Change Doom Is Hype

/ Jack Marshall / 11 Comments

Bill Gates, nerd and “on the spectrum” sufferer that he is, also has the advantage of being sufficiently rich that he is insulated from Leftist fury when he defies wokist cant. Today the climate change scam collective is presumably freaking out because Gates has issued a memo saying, in effect, “Oopsie! What a stupid I am! I let a bunch of agenda-driven scientists and lying (or ignorant) activists convince me to waste billions of dollars on their dishonest hustle! Oh well, live and learn…”

Continue reading →

“Social Media Is An Idiot Detection Service,” Episode #789K

/ Jack Marshall / 20 Comments

Today’s episode, from “X”:

Sharmine Narwani, we are told, is a well-known journalist and political analyst specializing in West Asian geopolitical issues. She believes that Islam was around six centuries before Muhammad was born. She wants to spread her ignorance far and wide.

The tweet has 25,000 “loves.” I regard it as a pre-holiday “Coming Attractions” feature, warning us of the fatuous Jesus=Illegal immigrants analogies we will be getting from our woke friends (and a lot of pulpits) all too soon.

(Pointer to Glenn Reynolds, who accurately notes, “Actually, of course, it was a Jewish kingdom when Jesus was born. And it didn’t become Arab or Muslim until the Mohammedan invasion of the 7th century. Today’s inhabitants of “Palestine” are settler-colonialists. Israel is fighting a war of indigenous resistance to colonization.”

For The Trump-Derangement Archives: Unethical Quote of the Week That Made Me Not Bother To Pay Any More Attention

/ Jack Marshall / 4 Comments

“I Particularly Like the Line Where You Said Trumpism Is Seeking ‘To Amputate the Higher Elements of the Human Spirit — Learning, Compassion, Science, and the Pursuit of Justice, and Supplant Those Virtues With Greed, Retribution, Ego and Appetite.'”

—-Ancient and execrable Washington Post pundit E.J. Dionne (EA dossier here)) in the course of a metaphorical mutual masturbation session with NYT Stockholm Syndrome conservative David Brooks (EA dossier here), plus former host of NPR’s “All Things Considered” Robert Siegel, “Trump Has a Religion. What Do Democrats Have? Mamdani might be working in Democrats’ favor. But what about ‘No Kings’?”

Althouse flagged this, and I just couldn’t stomach reading it. Siegel’s bias is presumed from his long tenure at NPR, where, some readers will recall, I was blackballed for daring to defend Donald Trump on the air.

Ugh. The President pressuring universities to teach rather than indoctrinate and gutting the wasteful Cabinet department that had presided over catastrophic decline in pubic schools is “amputating” education. Enforcing the laws is “amputating” compassion. Refusing to waste trillions in response to politically-inspired climate change hype is “amputating” science. The arrogance and smug certitude of these close-minded assholes…double ugh. I’ll listen to and read my Trump Deranged friends  when they say these things because at least they aren’t paid for it and are just bloviating emotion-based opinions. But these guys…

Who can keep reading their junk and its ubiquitous equivalents? (OK, I skimmed a bit and learned that they all think the stupid “No Kings” protests were wonderful.) More to the point, how dim and confused do you have to be to take this discussion as anything but sour grapes from a sad, elite sector of our culture that wildly overplayed its hand, got its bluff called, and was exposed as the sinister charlatans they always were?

Althouse just threw this raw meat to her readers without making any statement herself: I’m sure she knew what would follow. You should check out the red-pilled comments, which almost entirely drip with contempt.  

You can read the exchange here (gift link) if you like. Me. I’ve got a sock drawer to organize.

Ethics Meltdown at American Family Field: Who’s The Ethics Miscreant? A Test…

/ Jack Marshall / 17 Comments

Shannon Kobylarczyk (above, from the phone video that became her undoing) was attending one of the National League Championship Series games between the Dodgers and the Brewers at American Family Field when her interaction with another fan altered the course of her life.

Ricardo Fosado, an out-of-town visitor from L.A. who favored the Dodgers, engaged in a little friendly needling with Sharon, a passionate Brewers partisan, when the Los Angeles team took the lead. (The Dodgers eventually won the 7-game series, sending them to the World Series, which begins this week.) “Why is everybody quiet?” he asked.

Kobylarczyk was in no mood for gloating. She shouted at Fosado: “Real men drink beer, pussy!” and threatened to call I.C.E. on the apparently Hispanic spectator. She then told the man in front of her that he should sic immigration enforcement on Fosado. Now he was annoyed. “Call ICE! Call ICE. I’m a U.S. citizen, war veteran, baby girl. War veteran, two wars. ICE is not gonna do nothing to me. Good luck!” he said.

Why do we know all this? Because someone in the crowd who should have been watching the game and minding his or her own business was recording the whole confrontation.

Kobylarczyk escalated: she went to stadium security and reported Fosado for disrupting her baseball experience, or something. They ushered him out of the stadium citing “public intoxication.”

The team is the Milwaukee Brewers, mind you.

But wait! There’s more! The asshole who videoed the episode put it on social media, where it went “viral.” This resulted in Kobylarczyk being labeled a racist, so her company, a Milwaukee-based recruitment and staffing outfit called the Manpower Group, fired her ( she was the associate general counsel) and issued a standard virtue-signaling announcement to take credit for standing up for “a culture grounded in respect, integrity, and accountability.” Then Kobylarczyk was forced to quit the board of directors at Make-A-Wish Wisconsin, which also issued a statement condemning her. Naturally the Brewers also had to get into the act, so they released this statement:

“The Brewers expect all persons attending games to be respectful of each other, and we do not condone in any way offensive statements fans make to each other about race, gender, or national origin. Our priority is to ensure that all in attendance have a safe and enjoyable experience at the ballpark.” 

Then the team banned both Fosado and Kobylarczyk from the ballpark forever. Yeesh! Talk about a mini-Ethics Train Wreck!

The candidates for Worst Ethics Dunce is this mess are:

Continue reading →

Pop Quiz: Which Answer From This Pathetic Couple Is Worse?

/ Jack Marshall / 12 Comments

I just rejoined “X” so I could pick off a post here and there, but I won’t be tricked into paying for a “blue check” again. That telling scene above just came to my attention. I was about to file it for a future “warm-up,” but decided to get it out of the way now.

At one of the stupid “No Kings” rallies Saturday, these two were asked if they supported the deportation of illegal immigrants. The guy, obviously the beta in the relationship, stutters, “Yes,” only to be admonished by his audibly sighing female companion. She then answers the same question with a “no” and explains, “It’s not illegal.”

Oh. Fascinating thought process there! Then the bearded guy, having been persuaded, almost, by her 1) dirty look and 2) her brilliant legal analysis, changes his answer to “I’m not sure.”

Which answer is worse, once we eliminate the ethical answer, which was “yes”? My vote goes to the weenie’s “I’m not sure”— stupid, cowardly, obviously insincere and still enabling law-breaking. That guy and his ilk are the ones who let the Left get away with its habitual “It isn’t what it is” strategy.

I hope the interviewer didn’t end that relationship. Those two deserve each other.

Confronting My Biases: Episode 23: Anyone Who Would Post or Sign or “Like” This Social Media “No Kings” Screed

/ Jack Marshall / 18 Comments

This certifiably awful, annoying, hysterical, factually wrong, ignorant, stupid, smug and inarticulate thing turned up on my Facebook feed last night for the first time. Except for the nice, once intelligent friend who posted it, none of the signatories—there are hundreds—were known to me, but I’m sure that will change now.

I had to wrestle with myself longer than usual not to append a sharply worded comment to it: I would have been the first one. As we have established here in the many posts (too many, I suppose) I have written about the tragedy of Trump Derangement, it is futile to argue with these people, as they are beyond enlightening or reason.

But I know, I KNOW, that many wonderful people I respect, admire and care about will blindly sign on to this statement, manifesto, letter, whatever you want to call it, and that some of them would turn on me viciously if I ventured to point out the document’s undeniable flaws. So I want to treat this as I would a giant wart on a friend’s nose, a birthmark, a stutter, an annoying speech pattern or habitual bad breath, but boy, it’s hard.

So behold the monstrosity!

Continue reading →

Addendum: “And the Charlie Kirk Assassination Ethics Train Wreck Rolls On…”

/ Jack Marshall / 11 Comments

I started writing this as a comment to the lively thread that has followed last night’s post, but decided to make it a separate post because the discussion raises its own ethical issues.

The Kirk denigration since the Turning Point USA founder’s death resembles that old kids game “telephone.” You would whisper a statement into the ear of the kid next to you who would pass it along down a line of ten or more and finally compare the original message to what the last one in the line heard. Hilarity usually ensued, as the vagaries of oral communication and the reception thereof resulted in “Mikey has a crush on Sue Brandeberry” turning into “Nike is suing someone who smeared crushed berries on its brand.” “Telephone” is a benign interpretation of a lot of the slander and libel against Kirk’s character and legacy; the non-benign interpretation is that people are just lying.

In the thread, a respected commenter here sparked some angry responses by answering my repeated question in the original post [“What did Kirk do or say that could possibly justify these freakouts?”] thusly: “At a guess, it might be his statement that passing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was a mistake that might have been an issue. Or his highly uncomplimentary statements about Martin Luther King Jr and the approval of his assassination. Freedom of speech and all that.”

I have heard or read several equivalent versions of that answer since Kirk’s death, and they are worth clarifying and discussing.

Continue reading →