Hopeless, Legitimate or Right-Wing Propaganda? The White House’s Smithsonian Exhibit Hit List

The New York Times reports,

The White House published a list of Smithsonian exhibits, programming and artwork it considered objectionable on Thursday, one week after announcing that eight of the institution’s museums must submit their current wall text and future exhibition plans for a comprehensive review.

The list borrows heavily from a recent article in The Federalist that objected to portrayals at several museums. It argued that the National Museum of American History promoted homosexuality by hanging a pride flag; overemphasized Benjamin Franklin’s relationship to slavery in its programming; and supported open borders by depicting migrants watching fireworks “through an opening in the U.S.-Mexico border wall.”

Other grievances were previously enumerated in an executive order that President Trump authorized in March, which criticized the National Museum of African American History and Culture for a 2020 worksheet that describes aspects of “whiteness” as “hard work,” “individualism” and “the nuclear family.” The worksheet was part of an online educational portal called Talking About Race; once it drew criticism, Lonnie G. Bunch III, the secretary of the Smithsonian, had it removed.

The White House list also featured complaints that were not part of the Federalist article or the president’s executive order. Those include a stop-motion animation at the National Portrait Gallery about Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, a government leader during the coronavirus pandemic, and a series at the African American museum that it says “featured content from hardcore woke activist Ibram X. Kendi.”

Continue reading

About That “Racist” Democrat Sign in Virginia…

I’ve been wrestling with myself over whether to comment on the photo above, which is getting lots of play in the conservative media (especially in the D.C. area) and none at all in the Axis news sources. To begin with, I have been wondering whether the sign is a fake. The alleged message that is causing all the ruckus is on the back of the sign, and something else is on the other side that I can’t quite make out. Odd.

Winsome Sears is the Lieutenant Governor in Virginia and was widely regarded as a rising star of the GOP when the conservative black woman was elected, but she has been regularly thrashed in the polls compared to her Democratic opponent, Rep. Abigail Spanberger, a pro-abortion Pelosi acolyte whose shtick is to pose as a “moderate” since compared to so many of her thoroughly whacked-out woke colleagues, she is one.

Is that message on the back of the sign really racist? It is unquestionably stupid, and proposes a dubious analogy, but is referring to a candidate’s race inherently “racist”?

I tend toward regarding that message as Golden Rule-based, as in “How would you feel if a law prevented you from using public facilities?” I suspect that Sears could deftly explain why the two situations are not equivalent, but by the admittedly low standards of political signs generally, I’m inclined to give that one a pass.

The other issue being raised by the sign in some quarters is the age, gender and race of the woman holding it. Many have commented on how the loudest protesters against the National Guard’s efforts to reduce crime in D.C. are white seniors, and white senior women especially. Why is this? Aging hippies? Is it because seniors are the demographic most likely to watch cable news, and thus are most susceptible to MSNBC brain (and ethics) rot?

If I Were Not An Ethicist…

I had an occasion to drive downtown to D.C. this morning. You would think, based on what the Axis media is telling us, that the city looks like occupied territory, with armed soldiers menacing pedestrians. In truth, I saw one group of about seven Guardsmen by the Lincoln Memorial, and they were not armed. (I tooted at them and they waved at me.)

But I digress. Once again, I parked on a street, Connecticut Avenue, and once again used a parking station where you punch in how long you are planning on parking, scan a credit card, and get a receipt that you are supposed to place on your dashboard. And once again, the system didn’t work: I paid, but got no receipt.

So I wrote down the time and the amount I paid on a piece of paper with my name and phone number, explaining that the system had malfunctioned, and put that so it was visible through the windshield

I returned to a ticketless car. I have now used this method three times in D.C., all successfully. This also means that the modern parking system has failed for me more often than not; in fact four times out of six attempts. (Once I just took a chance and didn’t post anything.)

Now, if I were not an ethicist, I would be sorely tempted to use my note method without paying the parking fee at all. I can think of many rationalizations for doing so. The D.C. government is incompetent. That parking system stinks. The city deserves to lose money; it also wastes my time as the system forces me to write out long explanations for a situation that isn’t my fault.

But I am an ethicist, so I won’t do that. I won’t…

Ethics Dunces: Rolling Stone, and Everyone Else Who Thinks Assaulting Law Enforcement Is OK As Long As the Missile Is Funny

The Justice Department has fired employee Sean Charles Dunn after video showed him throwing a submarine sandwich at the chest of an law enforcement officer as a gesture of defiance against President Trump’s entirely legal executive take-over of crime control in the District of Columbia. He hurled the sandwich at the officer’s chest and tried to run away. When Dunn was apprehended, he told police: “I did it. I threw a sandwich.”

FBI Director Kash Patel announced that Dunn had indeed been “charged with felony assault on a federal officer.” Attorney General Pam Bondi noted on social media that “if you touch any law enforcement officer, we will come after you.” And he was fired.

The arrest, the charge and the employment action were all appropriate, but the Axis news media decided to weigh in as a fan of interfering with law enforcement and subjecting officers to thrown items, although doing so, whatever the missile, is pure assault and also battery (if the thrown item connects with its target).

Continue reading

Open Forum!

Three weeks after I inflicted a giant hematoma on (in?) my leg, I’m still having trouble getting past the two-post-a-day barrier, in great part because I’m hopeless on a laptop, and sitting at my desk in the office is still painful. I’m sorry: I’m missing a lot; the EA runway looks like a Reagan National flight stop due to high winds and thunderstorms.

A needed observation on the Trump Presidency so far: wow. That wow isn’t about what Trump and his team are doing, but the fact that they are doing it. I’ve compared Trump II to Andrew Jackson, but I now believe he is channeling my favorite President of all (again, in terms of Oval Office conduct, not policy), Teddy Roosevelt. Teddy, like Trump, was a Presidential activist and believed in using the power he had to do things, fix things, and project American power abroad. He also believed fervently in American exceptionalism, as all Presidents (and citizens) should. Like TR, Trump is trying to stop international conflicts that don’t directly involve the United States: Roosevelt was the first U.S. President to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, and Trump has already exceeded his accomplishments in that sphere.

You would think he could get some praise from the Axis for this. Nah. The news media is still relentlessly attacking him and everything he does, and there are enough Stage 5 Trump Derangement victims and gullible, manipulated fools among the public to keep Trump’s polling numbers under water.

To his great credit, President Trump doesn’t seem to care. Among the many ways his second term is breaking with conventional wisdom, he has turned his lame duck status into a weapon. Fascinating. There is so much to see and learn from going on. Those who refused to pay attention are missing a great show and a transformational Presidency, as Trump joins the lofty company of Washington, Andy, Honest Abe, Teddy, FDR and the Gipper.

Over to you…

Gerrymandering Ethics

The hypocritical back and forth about Texas’s planned redistricting to get more Republican reps is just silly. As many have pointed out, Illinois, where the protesting Texas Democratic Senators fled, has one of the most blatant gerrymandering in the nation. California, Maryland, New York and Massachusetts have similarly used long-held Democrat majorities in the state legislatures to ensure that Republicans are under-represented. No, two wrongs don’t make a right, but the Donkeys are estopped from pulling a Captain Dreyfus tantrum. They are shocked—shocked!—that Republican majorities would use redistricting to maximize GOP gains in the House.

Come on.

I have never been sure what is the fairest and most democratic way to draw districts. The original controversies arose when Southern states carefully drew districts to split up black neighborhoods. I get it, but I’m also not sure that it benefits the nation or a state to have districts dominated by anti-American, un-assimilated immigrant populations, like the Somali district that gave us Rep. Omar, the Palestinian district that inflicts Rep. Tlaib on Congress, or the district that features the Congresswoman, Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-IL), who says she is loyal to Guatamala first, and the U.S. second.

District construction is a zero sum game: if minorities gain more power, it is at the expense of diversity of viewpoints and dissenting voices in other districts. One more thing I am unsure of: whether there is any fair and just way to draw Congressional districts.

I might favor a system that imposes a random grid on a state, and communities and neighborhoods be damned. Have them redrawn before every election.

It’s Time To Concede That The NYT Is Just A Partisan Propaganda Organ and Little Else

Above is a Times front page in which the paper piled on to the international criticism of Israel in the Left’s “Think of the Children!” effort to blame Jews for the consequences of the war Hamas started and refuses to end.

“Mohammed Zakaria al-Mutawaq, about 18 months, with his mother, Hedaya al-Mutawaq, who said he was born healthy but was recently diagnosed with severe malnutrition,” the original caption to the photo said. Evil Israel is starving innocent children to death! Then, five days after the story was published, on July 29, the Times issued an editor’s note (buried at the bottom of the article) as well as a brief statement on its communications social media page that corrected its story, writing that it “had learned” that the child had underlying medical issues that affected his muscle development. Otherwise it did not retract any part of the feature, “Gazans Are Dying of Starvation,” including its now especially dubious claim that the child was suffering from malnutrition due to food shortages.

Continue reading

Ethics Quiz: Teaching Constitutional Law

This is a bit different from the usual Ethics Alarms quiz.

Over at Dorf on Law, a site I had forgotten about, Eric Segal poses twenty questions about how Constitutional Law should be taught from this point going forward. They are:

Continue reading

Observations on the Cincinnati Beatdown

While languishing in the hospital, this was the story that I felt most frustrated about not being able to post. Not that I could get a single, clear, spin-free account of what happened. In the aftermath of some Cincinnati event or festival or something, a black man and a white one got into a verbal altercation. The white guy seems to have uttered a racial slur, precipitating a brawl that was quickly joined by a mob of black youths who beat up the white guy and then turned their anger on a white woman who tried to intervene, knocking her unconscious and kicking her as she lay helpless on the ground. An estimated hundred bystanders, most or all of them black, stood by taking videos, laughing, and cheering the mob violence on. There was only one call to 911.

1. Almost all of the national coverage of this incident has been on Fox News. The New York Times, interestingly, hasn’t reported the story at all. The natural question has been raised: If a black man and woman had been attacked and beaten by a mob of young whites as 100 white bystanders cheered them on, there would be protests in the streets and calls for “justice.” Why the double standard?

Continue reading

As If Any More Proof Was Needed, Trump 1.0 Nemesis Jim Acosta Reveals Himself Beyond All Question To Be An Unethical Hack

You see, no decent, ethical journalist would even think of doing this. No intelligent journalist—or pest removal professional—would either. Yet this is the guy CNN sicced on President Trump and his press secretaries in his first term. This irredeemable partisan hack became a broadcast news star with neither the common sense, acumen, professional skills or decency to justify such status, which he is making a living off now.

This is CNN. This is Jim Acosta. This is the state of American journalism.

Former CNN correspondent Jim Acosta released the video of him interviewing an AI-generated version of Joaquin Oliver, who is dead. He’s one of the 17 victims of the 2018 mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, the tragedy that also inflicted David Hogg on the world, as if the shooting itself wasn’t horrible enough.

The avatar was animated from a photograph of the late 17-year-old who appears wearing a beanie while speaking in a monotone digital voice. Acosta begins by asking, “What happened to you?” to which the AI version of Oliver responds, “I was taken from this world too soon due to gun violence while at school. It’s important to talk about these issues so we can create a safer future for everyone.”

Let’s pass on the conduct of the parents in creating the creepy thing, which is right out of an episode of “Black Mirror.” The topic is journalism ethics. Today’s reporters are so estranged from the concepts of honesty, respect, objectivity, responsibility and trustworthiness that no ethics alarm pings when someone says, “Hey Jim! Apparently there’s an AI version f one of those dead Parkland kids. Why don’t you interview him? Maybe he’ll say something nasty about Trump!”

True, Acosta is pretty much the bottom of the barrel in the profession that is already the bottom of the profession barrel, but still, it wasn’t that long ago that a stunt like this would be considered outrageous if attempted by a shock jock like The Greaseman or Howard Stern. I would say that this is the canary dying in the mine, except that then Chris Cuomo or Don Lemon might interview an AI version of the canary.

[Even WordPress is disgusted; it won’t let me download a photo of this asshole.]