Serious Question: Has Vice-President Harris Not Read The Bill of Rights, Or Does She Just Want The Government To Ignore It?

This would be an “Incompetent Elected Official” post, except a) we already know Kamala Harris is incompetent, and b) her penchant for talking nonsense, gibberish or idiocy long ago reached Julie Principle proportions. But other Democrats, notably Hillary Clinton, have appealed to ignorance, emotion and hysteria by doing what Harris did yesterday as part of the wholly predictable Democratic Party/progressive/mainstream media attack on gun rights after a mass shooting tragedy. This one, as you probably know already, was in Maine, and unusually deadly, so the gun-grabbing fanatics and the “Do something!” crazies were really licking their chops.

On stage with Australia’s Prime Minister at an event yesterday, Harris blathered, “Gun violence has terrorized and traumatized so many of our communities in this country. And let us be clear, it does not have to be this way, as our friends in Australia have demonstrated.”

As usual, Harris required a translator. It doesn’t have to be “this way” in Australia? Have our communities been terrified there? How has Australia demonstrated what is possible or desirable in the United States? It hasn’t, of course: it hasn’t even demonstrated that it is possible to eliminate mass shootings in Australia, where the National Firearms Agreement of 1996 made semiautomatic weapons and shotguns illegal and mandated the confiscation of close to 650,000 firearms.  The NFA requires Australians to wait 28 days before they purchase a gun to allow extensive background checks. Applicants must obtain a license and a permit, be over 18 years old, provide documentation that the weapon will be stored securely and complete firearms safety training. They must also provide a “justifiable reason” for owning the gun, and self-defense doesn’t qualify. A requirement less stringent than this was just struck down as unconstitutional in New York.

Continue reading →

Schadenfreude Bonus: Watching Harvard Face The Consequences Of Its Own Hypocrisy and Corrupted Values

New Harvard President Claudine Gay can be expected to issue a fourth clarification of her initial reactions to the University’s large anti-Semitic contingent cheering on the Hamas massacre of Jewish citizens on October 7. To read Gay’s inaugural speech upon becoming the new president of America’s oldest and most storied educational institution, one would think “all is well” at Harvard, as Faber College student Kevin Bacon futilely screamed in the epic finale of “Animal House.” In marvelous ramalama-dingdong fashion, the standard issue race-obsessed progressive scholar babbled, predictably as Harvard’s first black President, about “this institution’s long history of exclusion and the long journey of resistance and resilience to overcome it.” Then she proved incapable of reacting forcibly when Harvard’s long history of anti-Semitism suddenly revealed itself not to have been resisted enough. Indeed, Harvard’s relentless efforts at woke indoctrination guarantee that it will flourish.

As discussed here, 31 Harvard campus organizations famously announced that Israel was fully responsible for all the violence erupting in and out of Gaza. Then, after efforts were made to reveal the names of the participating pro-terrorism and historically ignorant students so potential employers could cross them off their lists, we learned how well Harvard imbues its students with the ethical virtues of integrity, accountability, honesty, loyalty and prudence, along with such enabling virtues as fortitude, courage, and sacrifice. At least ten of the groups announced that they no longer endorsed the letter, now that there might be consequences attached to signing it. Some student members swore that they never approved the letter that their groups signed; others proclaimed that they didn’t really mean to say what the letters said, or that they hadn’t read it carefully.

Got it: you’re incompetent, irresponsible and cowardly fools. These reactions do not enhance your attraction as potential employees.

Continue reading →

Minneapolis’s Woke And Deluded DA Foiled By An Ethical Judge

Good.

In 2019, 39-year-old Steve Markey, sitting in his car in Minneapolis, was murdered during an unsuccessful carjacking attempt. The two teenage suspects both fired shots at Markey. They were arrested the next day after a string of other violent crimes. Both confessed to the murder.

Minneapolis’s DA before the current woke District Attorney Mary Moriarty said he would try the defendants as adults. One of the defendants, Husayn Braveheart (above), now 20 years old, fought to have his case remain in juvenile court where the punishment would be more moderate than in adult court: his co-defendant received a 22-year sentence when tried as an adult. In November 2022, the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that Braveheart should be certified for trial as an adult after determining the State had met the burden of proof on a series of public safety factors including Braveheart’s culpability and his history of failing to participate in diversion programs and other therapy.

But at a pretrial hearing in August, Moriarty announced that she had entered into a plea agreement in which Braveheart would serve just 1 year in a workhouse and 5 years of probation.  Under the deal, the 20-year-old would serve no prison time for murder.

Continue reading →

Unethical Quote Of The Month: Barack Obama

“The Israeli government’s decision to cut off food, water and electricity to a captive civilian population threatens not only to worsen a growing humanitarian crisis; it could further harden Palestinian attitudes for generations, erode global support for Israel, play into the hands of Israel’s enemies, and undermine long term efforts to achieve peace and stability in the region….”

—–Former President Barack Obama, sticking his nose into a matter that he should have no say in, and further enhancing his established record as a foreign policy incompetent.

The former President’s advice comes in an annoying post on Medium titled, “Thoughts on Israel and Gaza.” Primarily, his comments are stupid, but individuals with out-sized influence on public opinion, like irrationally popular ex-Presidents, have an ethical obligation to avoid allowing their stupidity to infect public affairs. How could anything “further harden Palestinian attitudes for generations” when for generations Palestinians have wanted to kill as many Jews as possible and wipe their nation from the map? Is Obama warning Israel that they risk really, really making Palestinians hate them? And nothing Israel does that isn’t suicidal will assist “efforts to achieve peace and stability in the region.” There will be peace and stability when the Palestinians genuinely condemn terrorism and accept that Israel is a legitimate nation…in other words, never.

Continue reading →

David Mamet On The Self-Destructive Opposition To Israel By American Jews

I have concluded that there are three categories of Americans calling for a cease-fire in Gaza and blabbering on about a “peaceful and humane” resolution of the Israel-Palestinian conflict. First, there are the anti-Semites, who willfully pretend that the plight of Palestinians isn’t tied to the group’s stated determination to wipe Israel from the map. Then there are the Lennonites, whose brains have been turned to mush by the fantasies of John’s “Imagine.” They want to eliminate war, and stubbornly think that is possible when terrorists and evil-doers like Hamas have forced a reckoning from the beginning of nations. Finally, there are the idiots, ignorant of history, distracted only by loyalties, biases, mob passions and emotion.

It is fascinating to speculate which of these three categories explain Jewish American peace activists like the thousands who marched on Capitol Hill, where they carried Palestinian flags and called for support of “Palestinian rights.” In a related display, hundreds of activists held a sit-in inside one of the Capitol buildings, organized by Jewish Voice for Peace and IfNotNow, who claim to want a just and peaceful resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Playwright, screenwriter and author David Mamet has written a deft analysis of the phenomenon called “How the Democrats betrayed the Jews: The sick thrill of antisemitism has a price.”

Mamet is thoughtful commentator whose mind is usually occupied with ethics problems (almost all of his plays and movies have ethics at their core), and who is currently unpopular with the artistic left ever since he proclaimed that nobody but him had any business deciding what was a good enough reason to buy a gun. Do read the whole piece, but here are some jewels…

Continue reading →

Alternate Titles: 1. “Coke Says ‘Never Mind!'”; 2. “One Down, Thousands To Go” 3. “Black Lives Matter? We Have No Idea What You’re Talking About!”

This is what George Will likes to call “condign justice.”

Coca-Cola was one of thousands of corporations large and small to leap onto the George Floyd Freakout bandwagon and endorse Black Lives Matter even though it should have been obvious that the group was 1) racist 2) Marxist 3) violent and 4) a scam. Now is reaping the consequences it so richly deserves, as BLM has, naturally, come out in support of Hamas’s terror attack on Israel.

Many who were disgusted (like me) at the transparently cynical and opportunistic toadying by the corporate sector when it realized bashing police and demonizing whites was cool have been quick to point out Coke’s transgression. Here’s an example:

Coca-Cola’s reaction, cowards and ethics-free louses that they are, has been to quietly remove all references to BLM from the company’s website, where it once boasted of its financial support (now doubtless being used to fund one or more of the BLM leaders’ extravagances). Here’s the page: no mention of Black Lives Matter in sight.

Continue reading →

“Do You Know Who I Am?” Yes. You’re Under-Educated Knee-jerk Progressive Celebrities Under The Delusion That Your Opinion Is Special

What makes a washed-up child star like Alyssa Milano think that her analysis of the Hamas-Israel war should carry any special weight with the President of the United States? What makes any of the other acting Leftists who signed the statement—this predictable crew—

—think their letter should be taken any more seriously than, say, one signed by 60 or so dog-walkers or 7-11 clerks? It shouldn’t, you know. I know lots of actors; some of my best friends are actors, really and truly. But with notable exceptions, their political views are the product of working and socializing in a bubble where there are virtually mandatory political beliefs. Most of my acting friends–“artists”–would watch an hour of MSNBC and say, “Sounds good to me!” because they lack the historical perspective or depth of understanding to challenge the woke orthodoxy of their peers and employers.

Alyssa’s screed goes off the rails immediately. There is no “Palestine.” People who elect a terrorist group to represent them are responsible for the predictable consequences. As one wag neatly put it, Hamas “pearl-harbored” Israel: that’s a brutal act of war, and demands a response that will teach the lesson forever that you can’t do that, and if you do, the results will be dire. Hamas uses Gaza’s children as human shields, and that tactic must never be allowed to work. Calling for a cease fire when the piper is about to be paid makes Hamas’s intolerable conduct practical. Calling for Palestinians to benefit in any way as a result of the terror attack validates terrorism.

Continue reading →

Where Have You Gone, James Donovan, Our Nation Turns Its Fearful Eyes To You…[Updated]

Woo woo woo.

Yesterday, I was moved to re-watch “Bridge of Spies,” the excellent Spielberg and Coen Brothers-told tale of James Donovan, the lawyer (portrayed by Tom Hanks) who negotiated the release of Francis Gary Powers in exchange for convicted Soviet spy Rudolf Abel. Maybe something in the deep recesses of my mind was triggered by yesterday’s post about the rigged prosecution, trial and conviction of the four Minnesota police officers involved in George Floyd’s death. What was striking about the movie was that Donovan is shown being recruited by his law firm to defend Abel, described as “the most hated man in America” at the height of the Cold War, to demonstrate to the Soviets that we guarantee a fair trial and zealous legal representation to everyone accused of a crime, irrespective of public opinion and the nature of the crime. Everyone has the same rights.

Donovan did defend Abel, even though it is made clear in the film that the judge was determined to see him convicted and that Donovan himself as well as his family were endangered by his taking the case. After Abel was convicted despite the fact that the evidence used by the prosecution should have been excluded as the “fruits” of an illegal search, Donovan appealed the result all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, defying his firm’s opposition to him continuing the case. His partners argued that the unpopularity of Abel risks alienating clients. Donovan’s initial representation sent the required symbolic message, they said, and even though the conviction may have been unjust, there was no reason to be obsessed with those due process and rights details, not for an enemy spy who might have been facilitating an enemy’s nuclear attack.

Continue reading →

George Floyd Ethics Train Wreck Update: Don’t Tell Me This Is A Surprise…

Let’s begin with a side bet: What will you wager that any major mainstream media outlet will report this?

Alpha News tells us that (the bolding is mine)…

Continue reading →

Ethics Quiz: “Oh No! It’s HITLER!!!”

My ethics alarms just don’t ring very loudly on this incident. Maybe yours do.

A pregame trivia video before a Michigan State football game included a photo of Adolf Hitler on the Spartan Stadium scoreboard. (The question asked where Der Fuhrer was born.)

Though I have seen no record of whether there were complaints, the school felt it necessary to issue a profuse apology:

Really? Displaying a photograph of a historical figure who appears in hundreds of movies, is spoofed in multiple comedies and film classics, as part of a bland trivia question (It’s not like the question was about the Final Solution) requires an apology and results in a contract cancellation?

Your Ethics Alarms “Please explain this to the ethicist” Ethics Question of the Day is…

Is this a fair, competent and responsible reaction by Michigan State?

Continue reading →