SCOTUS’s 9-0 Smackdown of Democratic State Lawfare to Stop Trump Exposes the Unethical Left for All to See

All to see, that is, except those whose eyes have been so jaundiced by hate, indoctrination and lies that they are blind.

A 9-0 decision by an ideologically fractured U.S. Supreme Court, rejecting a cherished partisan fantasy devised to hold on to power that one party has empathically shown that it is unfit to possess, should logically result in frank admissions of error, bias, foolishness and confusion by those who insisted that the tactic thus condemned was correct, legal and wise. But today’s progressives are not logical, nor are they self-aware or particularly smart. The reactions from pundits, left-warped lawyers and others (what are the creatures on “The View”?) really should be viewed as a gift. They are telling us what they are, admitting what they are. It’s ironic: the first post of the day was titled, “Will the Disastrous Results of The Great Stupid Result in Learning, So Behavior Changes, or Will the Fools Responsible Keep Trying To Govern On Dreams Rather Than Reality?,” but it wasn’t about the Trump-Deranged learning from their absurd and intellectually indefensible embrace of the 14 Amendment Trump disqualification plot. The SCOTUS decision hadn’t come down yet. Nevertheless, the headline is apt in the aftermath of the decision and the Axis’s embarrassing tantrums. They won’t learn because they can’t learn, even though refusing to admit their mistakes makes them ridiculous, untrustworthy and unpersuasive.

Here are the kinds of people who have been running our government, journalism, entertainment, law schools and universities:

Continue reading →

So It’s Come to This: A Question About Sandwiches Reveals the Insane Ideological Divide and the News Media’s Bias

I’m embarrassed to have to write about this crap.

Earlier this week former New York Times editor Adam Rubenstein published a tell-all about his experiences at the paper in “The Atlantic.” His theme: the oppressive progressive bias that made him feel like an outsider.

Rubenstein related a minor incident when he was criticized for saying that Chick-fil-A’s spicy chicken sandwich was his favorite after being asked about his sandwich preferences at his orientation. Rubenstein wrote that an HR rep replied, “We don’t do that here. They hate gay people,” and the other Times employees signified their approval of the rebuke by snapping their fingers.

So the Times hires Beatniks now! Good to know.

Continue reading →

Biden-Supporters Are Officially Ethically Estopped From Complaining That Trump Lies

President Biden went on Seth Myers’s late night show this week to bask in a fawning interview by a partisan supporter who wouldn’t ask him any questions harder than “What’s your favorite flavor of ice cream?,” and still managed to screw up.

After the show’s taping, Biden was confronted by reporters while licking an ice-cream cone and asked when a Gaza ceasefire might occur. “I hope by… the end of the weekend,” Biden answered. “My national security advisor tells me we’re close. We’re close. It’s not done yet. My hope is by next Monday, we’ll have a ceasefire,” Biden said. That was great news for anti-Israel progressives, and right before the Michigan primary, where Biden was likely to face Arab protest votes against his re-nomination.

Continue reading →

OK, I Know “Mary Poppins” Well Enough That When I Heard That the BBC Had Ruled That It Contained “Offensive Language,” I Immediately Knew Why

Why, that is, other than the fact that the UK has been lobotomized by The Great Stupid even more than the U.S. has.

Do you know what was “offensive” in one of my all-time favorite movies without cheating? Think, now…

Time’s up!

It’s this: Admiral Boom, a senile neighbor of the Banks family whose sole purpose in the plot is to set up a running gag showing how the Banks’ and their servants routinely deal with his shooting off a cannon (the house shakes, furniture slides around, things fall off shelves, hilarity reigns), twice refers to “Hottentots.”

The British Board of Film Classification announced that the film was resubmitted for a rating this month in preparation for a theatrical re-release. The Borad reclassified if from “G” to “PG” for discriminatory language, a spokesperson explained. “Mary Poppins (1964) includes two uses of the discriminatory term ‘Hottentots’…While “Mary Poppins” has a historical context, the use of discriminatory language is not condemned, and ultimately exceeds our guidelines for acceptable language. We therefore classified the film PG for discriminatory language.” The term was once used by the British to describe the Khoikhoi and San nomadic tribes in southern Africa—surely you remember them?

Continue reading →

The Self-Terrorism of the Late Aaron Bushnell

I decided that we don’t need to see Bushnell’s last act, setting himself on fire in front of the Israeli Embassy in D.C. You can find the video if you look. Publicizing that pointless suicide only gives some small purpose to a deranged stunt that doesn’t deserve the attention.

The 25-year-old a cyberdefense operations specialist with the 531st Intelligence Support Squadron at Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland in Texas self-immolated Buddhist-style two days ago, dousing himself with gasoline and saying on the scene, “I am an active duty member of the US Air Force and I will no longer be complicit in genocide.”

” I am about to engage in an extreme act of protest,” he continued, “but compared to what people in Palestine have been experiencing at the hands of their colonizers, it’s not extreme at all.”

“This is what our ruling class has decided will be normal,” he added, and shouted “Free Palestine!” in flames as his last words.

Whatever. Ram-a-lam-a-ding dong.

Continue reading →

Another “Nah, There’s No Mainstream Media Bias!” Smoking Gun: Trying to Pretend That Another Murder by an Illegal Immigrant Isn’t Blood on Biden’s Hands

On today’s CNN’s “AC360,” host Anderson Cooper described the “horrifying” details of student Laken Hope Riley’s murder on the University of Georgia campus last week, then quickly pivoted to spinning that “the revelation the suspect was in this country unlawfully” had caused the murder to be “politicized.” Earlier, CNN’s Jake Tapper similarly adopted the “Republicans pounce!” tactic, saying “They’re seizing on this as an example of Biden’s failure to protect the American people and secure the border.”

Damn right, because that’s what it is. This death should be politicized: it’s Willie Horton all over again, except that Biden and the open-borders Democrats didn’t just goof by releasing one dangerous criminal to prey on the public, they have released many, and are releasing many more. Trump on Truth Social said the obvious, that Riley’s murder should’ve ‘never happened.’” Of course it should never have happened. Illegal immigrants shouldn’t be allowed to roam free, and this one had already been arrested more than once.

Continue reading →

Confronting My Biases, Episode 7: Buying Lottery Tickets

Interjecting itself before my planned first post this morning is the latest installment of the Ethics Alarms series in which your friendly neighborhood ethicist examines the biases that may make him (that is, me ) stupid, or not. At my local 7-11 just now on an emergency errand, I spied one of my next door neighbors purchasing lottery tickets. I have long suspected that he is an idiot, and this pretty much locked down my diagnosis.

Ethics Alarms has covered the issue of state lotteries extensively; you can see most of the results at this depressing tag. The most recent piece was in 2022, reacting to a CNN segment that declared state lotteries to be racist because a disproportionate percentage of the players are black. I believe that CNN’s analysis is racist, and I ended the post this way…

Continue reading →

How Did California Conclude That It Could Constitutionally Ban the Possession of Billy Clubs?

A case out of the Golden State reaffirms my belief that there are too many unconstitutional laws around the country to count, and that a lot of them are passed by irresponsible legislators with their fingers crossed, hoping that the bogus government restrictions will slip through the judicial net.

For example, did you know that a California law makes it a crime to simply possess or carry a billy club, which is basically a stick? That’s ridiculous, but there was such a law until it was struck down last week by a Judge Roger Benitez, a federal judge in San Diego, who ruled in Fouts v. Bonta that billy clubs are protected by the Second Amendment. Why wouldn’t they be? California really is estranged from basic American values and common sense. (The state’s billy club prohibition would make it illegal for a member of the LA Dodgers to walk to the stadium carrying his bat.) The core of the opinion is this:

This case is not about whether California can prohibit or restrict the use or possession of a billy for unlawful purposes…. Historically, the short wooden stick that police officers once carried on their beat was known as a billy or billy club. The term remains vague today and may encompass a metal baton, a little league bat, a wooden table leg, or a broken golf club shaft, all of which are weapons that could be used for self-defense but are less lethal than a firearm…not everybody wants to carry a firearm for self- defense. Some prefer less-lethal weapons. A billy is a less-lethal weapon that may be used for self-defense. It is a simple weapon that most anybody between the ages of eight and eighty can fashion from a wooden stick, or a clothes pole, or a dowel rod. One can easily imagine countless citizens carrying these weapons on daily walks and hikes to defend themselves against attacks by humans or animals. To give full life to the core right of self-defense, every law-abiding responsible individual citizen has a constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms like the billy for lawful purposes.

In early America and today, the Second Amendment right of self-preservation permits a citizen to “‘repel force by force’ when ‘the intervention of society in his behalf, may be too late to prevent that injury.’” The Founders of our country anticipated that as our nation matured circumstances might make the previous recognition of rights undesirable or inadequate. For that event, the Founders provided a built-in vehicle by which the Constitution could be amended, but a single state, no matter how well intended, may not do so, and neither can this court.

What other unconstitutional laws are lurking out there, unchallenged?

The Chrystal Clanton Saga: I Don’t Understand This Story At All…

Does this make sense to you?

SCOTUS Justice Clarence Thomas has hired Crystal Clanton to be his law clerk beginning in the upcoming term. In 2015, when Clanton was 20 and working for Turning Point USA, she was accused of sending racist texts to a fellow employee. One alleged text read, “I HATE BLACK PEOPLE…Like fuck them all … I hate blacks. End of story.” The New Yorker’s Jane Mayer wrote about the texts in 2017 in an article about Turning Point USA, which is close with Thomas’s activist wife Ginni. Clanton wrote in an email to Mayer, “I have no recollection of these messages and they do not reflect what I believe or who I am and the same was true when I was a teenager.” The first aspect of the story I don’t understand: I am reading everywhere that Clanton didn’t deny writing the texts, which points to her guilt. I would say that stating that you don’t recall sending a message and that it isn’t something you believe, believed or would ever say is the equivalent of a denial.

Continue reading →

Helpful Ethics Alarms Tip For Girls’ and Women’s Athletes and Sports Team: Refuse to Compete Against Biological Males BEFORE Someone Gets Hurt

The KIPP Academy girls high school basketball team includes a (“transitioning”…or not, reports are unclear) a male player who “identifies” as female, which is all that the increasing wokeness-crippled Bay State requires. Section 43.3.1 of the Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association handbook states that “a student shall not be excluded from participation on a gender-specific sports team that is consistent with the student’s bona fide gender identity.”

And what, you may ask, is “bona fide gender identity”? The player in question is six-feet tall, appears to have facial hair more consistent with a teenage male, and is much stronger than the average drum majorette. The Daily Item reported that “KIPP officials refused to confirm the player’s gender identification,” but if she (he?) is playing on the girls team, presumably he (she?) identifies as female. Now, the Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association also says a student like that one can’t be included on a roster “solely for the purpose of gaining an unfair advantage.” The key word there is “solely,” a weasel word all lawyers are familiar with. It literally means that having a boy who will seem like a superstar in a girl’s sport on a team supposedly for females will be acceptable no matter how unfair it is and no matter how much of an advantage it gives that team if there is any other reason for letting him (her?) change locker rooms. Maybe the newly minted female needs a boost in confidence!

Continue reading →