Journalism & Media

“This Is Kamala Harris” Episode #2: Kamala Explains Cloud Computing

/ Jack Marshall / 69 Comments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XscsJq2FwQ

This ridiculous section of an as yet undated Harris speech (or appearance, or nervous breakdown) would have once fallen into the Ethics Alarms Julie Principle category. Yes, yes, we all know that the Vice President is a babbling idiot, and there’s no point in pouncing on every time she proves it; after all, fish gotta swim, birds gotta fly. That, however, was before the Democratic Party, in its desperation after being caught deceiving the American people (with the aid of its propaganda organs, the biased and unethical news media) that President Biden wasn’t teetering on the brink of total senility, decided to make Kamala its nominee for President while bypassing primaries, debates, voting, competition—you know, that whole democracy thingy they claim to be protecting.

Now, however, the various emerging examples of Harris talking off the top of what we generously call “her head” becomes suddenly relevant, and not to be ignored out of pity and kindness. As I wrote in installment #1 of “This is Kamala Harris” last week…

“Evidence like this will be buried, ignored, or denied by the mainstream media, just like Hunter Biden’s laptop, until enough Americans have been deceived to put Harris in the White House….Harris’s distorted values, cracked logic, obnoxious character and arrogance are all intolerable, and most normal people will see that, if they only are allowed to read, watch and hear. “

Why is this particularly ludicrous example of Kamala being Kamala (I know, we have been told that using her first name is sexist and racist. Bite me.) significant? Several reasons, including the fact that almost all the major news sources now know about it but have refused to mention it, just as they continue to hide the substance of Harris’s extreme policy positions. Yet if Joe Biden, at least once the order had gone out to bring him down, had babbled like this the MSM might well have cited it as more proof that there were squirrels in his attic, metaphorically speaking or in actuality. And in contrast, as we all know and as I wrote in the earlier post, “each word out of Donald Trump’s ever-open mouth will be spun and fact-checked to put him in the worst light possible.”

Among the other reasons the video is significant:

Continue reading →

Nah, There’s No Mainstream Media Bias! George Stephanopoulos vs. Rep. Byron Donalds

/ Jack Marshall / 16 Comments

As everyone knows by now, Donald Trump, appearing at the Black Journalists Association conference, responded to a question about whether he regards Harris as a D.E.I candidate by going in another direction, one that raised the issue of Harris’s integrity and ever-changing positions.

“Well, I can say, no, I think it’s maybe a little bit different,” Trump began. “So, I’ve known her a long time indirectly, not directly very much, and she was always of Indian heritage. And she was only promoting Indian heritage. I didn’t know she was black until a number of years ago when she happened to turn black. And now she wants to be known as black. So, I don’t know, is she Indian or is she black? But you know what, I respect either one.”

Trump was trolling, as usual, and spitting into the metaphorical wind, also as usual, so the reaction was entirely predictable, as EA already discussed here. It’s a week later, and the Axis is still trying to make a Trump ad lib the focus of its campaign “coverage.”

On ABC today, George Stephanopoulos couldn’t restrain his inner Democrat hack and flipped out because Trump surrogate Rep. Byron Donalds refused to concede that Harris’s manipulation of her various ethnic identity cards wasn’t a legitimate point for Trump to make. Here’s the full exchange:

Continue reading →

Being Fair To Imane Khelif

/ Jack Marshall / 19 Comments

I sure am glad I had the sense (for a change) to wait a while before writing about what is likely to be the most lasting ethics controversy of the 2024 Paris Olympics. The initial hysteria in the conservative media didn’t add up. My prize for the worst headline goes to the conservative sports blog Outkick: “Olympic Boxer Pretending To Be A Woman Pummels Opponent in 26 Seconds, Making Her Cry.” Nice.

What happened to launch this mess was an Olympic women’s boxing march pitting Algerian Imane Khelif and Italian boxer Angela Carini against each other. After 46 seconds Carini quit, something that almost never happens in in Olympic boxing. She didn’t shake Khelif’s hand after the referee raised it, then sank to her knees, weeping. She told reporters that she quit because of the pain from those opening punches from her opponent, saying that she has never been hit so hard in her life. Instantly, critic made the episode part of the trans women in sports controversy, a la Lia Thomas et al. That was simply wrong, careless, sloppy and unethical. Here is how the conservative commentary collective PJ Media described the scene:

On Thursday, the Olympics put on a disgraceful show, pitting a man with XY chromosomes against a biological woman. Algeria’s Imane Khelif won the 16 welterweight bout over Italy’s Angela Carini after pummeling his opponent’s head over and over again. After having her head slammed by the biological male for 46 seconds, Carini was done. She removed herself from the match and then crumbled to the mat in tears. Everyone who watched saw that the Italian boxer was no match for the Algerian, who had been disqualified from previous competitions for testing positive for male chromosomes. 

Wrong. Imane Khelif is not a biological man, but intersex, meaning that the proper analogy for her dilemma in Olympic competition is the intersex runner, Caster Semenya, whom I most recently discussed last fall. Here is how that post ended…

Continue reading →

Unethical Film and Theater Reviewer Bias, Part II: “OK, It’s a Good Movie, But Where’s the Climate Change Propaganda?”

/ Jack Marshall / 9 Comments

I supposed technically Margeret Renkl isn’t a film reviewer for the Times: officially she’s a “contributing opinion writer who covers flora, fauna, politics and culture in the American South.” I don’t care: she criticizes an action movie that audiences are enjoying because it doesn’t deliver the progressive agenda propaganda that she thinks good little Big Brotherites should jam into the brains of the trusting public at every opportunity.

Renkle can bite me, and so can the Times for publishing her dreck.

Renkl and the Times concede that “Twisters,” which appears to be the non-superhero hit that Hollywood desperately needs, “ is a humdinger of a summer blockbuster that delivers exactly what theatergoers want in an action film: plenty of explosions, destruction, high-speed chases and heroism, all with a dash of wit and sexual tension thrown in. It is not — and does not aspire to be — high cinematic art.” However, it is, she argues, a missed “golden opportunity to talk about what scientists know and don’t know about how climate change might be affecting the formation, strength, frequency and geographic distribution of tornadoes, or why they now tend to develop in groups.”

No, it’s really not. A movie people want to see for escape and entertainment isn’t a “golden opportunity” for the writers and producers to bombard them with favored and faddish data related to progressive public policy. The Ethics Alarms standard response to the “Why are you talking/writing/singing about what you want to instead of what I want to” is “Write your own blog, direct your own play, produce your own movie or sing your own song.

Continue reading →

Unethical Film and Theater Reviewer Bias, Part I: “Straight People Can’t Act”

/ Jack Marshall / 14 Comments

Film and theater reviewer biases and politics have always been a blight on the field: the late, absurdly worshiped New Yorker reviewer Pauline Kael would pan terrific John Wayne movies just because he had supported Barry Goldwater. It’s hard to watch a revival of “Hair” (or the stunningly bad film version) without wondering, “What were those reviewers raving about, with that faux rock music and the trite book?” Why, peace, pot and love, baby! ” Hair” was against the war in Vietnam, so it had to be at least as good as “Oklahoma!”

Now, of course, in the era of the Great Stupid, explaining what Big Brother’s tastes in the arts require is a job requirement for film and theater reviewer who are paid in real money rather than free passes. In a New York Times column about how “outdated” classic musicals (that is, insufficiently woke) can be salvaged by appropriately sensitive directors, for example, readers were informed by an “expert” that only gay actors can convincingly play gay characters.

Continue reading →

Ethics Villain: Ex-J.D. Vance Friend Sofia Nelson

/ Jack Marshall / 8 Comments

“Villain” is the best I can muster right now. I really can’t find the right word for someone who would do what Sofia Nelson did, or who would be able to look at themselves in the mirror after she did it.

Nelson, a close friend of J.D. Vance’s in law school and for many years thereafter, sent about 90 of the emails and text messages they exchanged from 2014 through 2017 to The New York Times. Nelson is gay or a trans-male or a trans-female, or something, I couldn’t possibly care less. Nor will I read the Times’ article about what its partisan “Slime Trump and Vance!” posse found in the emails thus far. All that matters from an ethics perspective is the throbbing betrayal of trust represented by anyone the sharing past private communications with a media outlet without obtaining consent and permission from the other party to the exchanges. It’s revolting that the Times would accept such stuff: this is a National Enquirer level story. Trump’s running mate once wrote “Love you” to a guy who is now a chick! Ew! Does that mean Vance is gay, not that there’s anything wrong with that?

Continue reading →

Great: Trump Makes Another Stupidly Phrased Comment That The News Media Will Use To Dishonestly Claim He’s Planning On Being a Dictator

/ Jack Marshall / 7 Comments

Boy, I’m sick of Trump being so reckless in his ad-libs and of the mainstream media’s deceit and disgusting double standards. The second I read Trump’s quote to a gathering of religious conservatives at The Believers’ Summit, an event hosted by the conservative group Turning Point Action in West Palm Beach —“Christians, get out and vote. Just this time. You won’t have to do it anymore, you know what? Four more years, it’ll be fixed, it’ll be fine, you won’t have to vote anymore, my beautiful Christians!”—I knew exactly how the Axis would spin it, and I was right. Harris pounced, the Times pounced (then they changed the heading to provide the context after the initial story ran), CNN pounced, they all pounced. See? There will never be another election if Trump wins! He just admitted it!

Continue reading →

Harris Is a D.E.I. Vice-President, and Ethics Alarms Hereby Pledges To Reiterate That Fact Every Time Some Liar, Hack or Gaslighter Says Otherwise…[Link Corrected]

/ Jack Marshall / 17 Comments

I’m drawing a line in the sand on this one. I am sick of the flagrant attempts by shameless partisans, Axis of Unethical Conduct liars and desperate Trump-Deranged propagandists to deny the past and the present, their own misdeeds, and their cascading humiliating botches. I am also disgusted with the ongoing efforts of these same aspiring dictators to win arguments and election by strangling the language and issuing rhetorical taboos so it becomes difficult to reveal what they have done, or allows the public to be confused and misled permanently.

Readers here are aware of some of my unyielding pledges. I have vowed to blow a blast on a metaphorical Sousaphone every time someone quotes the phony “76 cents on the dollar” statistic “proving” that the workplace discriminates against women. (The last time I scored a politician for doing that? It was Kamala Harris. Of course it was.) I have sworn to embarrass any movie, TV program or ad that shows someone playing chess with the board set up incorrectly. I am determined never to let an ethics dunce argue that cheater Barry Bonds belongs in the Hall of Fame because “other players did it” or because “he was good enough that he would have had a HOF career if he hadn’t cheated.” (That one makes me furious just writing it.)

I am never going to countenance anyone calling the stupid January 6 riot an “insurrection,” saying that Trump’s allegations that the 2020 election was “rigged” is “baseless,” or who repeats any of the multiplying Big Lies about what Trump has said in the past, the most recent example being flagged in a post today. I will not let any demagogue get away with saying that baker Jack Phillips discriminated against gay people when he said he would not be compelled to express approval of a gay wedding on one of his cakes because he believed this infringed his First Amendment rights.

Continue reading →

It Looks Like I’m Going To Have To Add Another Democratic Big Lie To The List…

/ Jack Marshall / 3 Comments

I had to run up to the office to get this down before other outrages intervened. (The list I’m alluding to is here.)

To start off the hearing today continuing the House inquiry into the Trump shooting, Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), began with a rant against “political violence” that he quickly turned into a partisan attack on Republicans. Among his statements was that Donald Trump had said that “there would be a bloodbath” if he wasn’t elected in 2024.

That’s a lie. It has been conclusively shown to be a lie. I wrote about the widespread misrepresentation of Trump’s comment at the time. Trump was using ‘bloodbath” in the economic sense, which is included in many dictionary definitions (“a period of disastrous loss or reversal“), referring to the auto industry. Quoting him out of that specific context, and placing the quote in the false context of “political violence” is intentional deceit, and deceit is lying.

The Democrats, including Nadler, know what Trump said and meant, but they keep using this false characterization anyway. Biden alluded to it repeatedly. Kamala Harris will be sure to do the same: let me know if I miss it when she does.

There are so many awful members of Congress on both sides of the aisle that I often forget about Nadler, one of the worst. He revealed himself to be a hyper-partisan hack during the Clinton House impeachment hearings, when he and the equally horrible Maxine Waters battled to a tie in the Democrats’ “it isn’t what it is” competition. He hasn’t improved since.

Democrats, all of them, are ethically estopped from repeating the mantra that Trump lies all the time as long as their party is addicted to Big Lies, which it is. Similarly, the newsmedia is hypocritical if it “factchecks” Trump without also pointing out deliberate dishonest smears like the one Nadler just vomited up.

Oh! I see that John Hammond has raised his hand! Yes, John?

I don’t blame you a bit.

So Kamala Harris is “Exciting” Now? Fascinating.

/ Jack Marshall / 15 Comments

I must confess, I have reached the point where the talking point memos going out to the Axis, its allies and useful idiots from the Democratic National Committee are so obvious that they are insulting. We have already been bombarded with the edicts from earlier memos: Trump is a “convicted felon” and a “threat to democracy.” If he’s elected, it will be our “last election” and “the end of American as we know it.” These memos are getting a bit frayed around the edges; the “threat to democracy” line is especially risible coming from a party that just chose a candidate for POTUS using no democratic tools whatsoever—no debates, no primaries, just a pre-rigged convention. This is the most Machiavellian choice of a Presidential candidate since a “smoke-filled room” produced a GOP Presidential candidate named Warren G. Harding—and didn’t that work out well! (To be fair to poor Warren, he was famously likable, which Harris is definitely not. Her staff had a 92% turnover in just three years; she is apparently roundly detested as a boss, almost as much as Donald Trump is.) These people really think Americans are idiots, and, sadly, they may be right. Since Joe Biden was kicked to the curb, I have heard double figures of delegates, Democratic officials and pundit describe the forced anointment of Kamala Harris as the party’s standard bearer in November described as either “exciting” or exhilarating.” This is only slightly more dishonest than the same people—and Harris—describing Joe Biden solving Rubik’s Cube blindfolded until they were shocked—shocked!—to discover that he was unable to maneuver through the complexities of Tic-Tac-Toe. For almost four years, the adjective to be most appropriately applied to Harris has been “embarrassing.”

Here at Ethics Alarms, I gave her a Julie Principle pass for the most part, meaning that I let dozens of absurd and dishonest, not to mention incomprehensible, statements by Harris go by without comment because it was obvious that—well, he’s how I put it before she was even sworn in, when she stole a Martin Luther King anecdote and claimed it was about her:

If, as many seem to assume, Harris is making stuff up to pander to the crowd, why fixate on this episode? We all know, or should, that the woman is shallow, has no core, and that saying whatever she thinks will endear herself to the most people at the moment is her defining characteristic. As Julie sang, “Fish gotta swim, birds gotta fly”: Kamala’s gotta make stuff up to pretend she’s something she’s not for the gullible, the naive, the hopeful and the blind. This latest example doesn’t tell us anything we already don’t know.

Even with that call to be merciful, Harris ended up with a hilariously long (and terrifying) EA dossier , especially for a Vice-President. I had a post in March of 2022 musing about whether she was the dumbest Vice-President ever, which Newt Gingrich had claimed. Kamala made my head explode a couple of months later when she said at some public appearance, “We will work together, and continue to work together, to address these issues, to tackle these challenges, and to work together as we continue to work operating from the new norms, rules, and agreements, that we will convene to work together…We will work together.” That time I summed up Harris this way:

Her existence as the #2 elected official in the United States is a profound embarrassment to the nation, the public and the democratic system. That such a clueless dolt was chosen purely because of her gender and race insults that gender and those ethnic communities unintentionally complicit in her creation.

That the news media refused to enlighten the public about just how incompetent she is proves its uselessness.

That Harris and her supporters have the astounding cheek to cry “racism” if criticism is aimed her way, when she routinely insults the public by presuming that first-grade level verbal pablum is good enough to feed them because she doesn’t have the capacity to offer anything better, impugns everyone responsible for her presence in place of someone minimally responsible and trustworthy.

Wait, when did she become “exciting” and “exhilarating”? How did I miss that? It must have been like “Charlie,” the now forgotten movie that earned Cliff Robertson an Oscar for playing a—oh, what’s the acceptable term now? To hell with it: in the movie he was referred to as “retarded”—man who suddenly became a genius after taking an experimental drug. Then his IQ starts slipping away—like Biden’s—and by the end of the movie he has the mind of a four-year-old and is playing on a swing.

Non-political junkies hadn’t paid any attention to Harris, who also looked “exciting” and “exhilarating” when the Axis media designated her its favorite to be the Democratic nominee at the head of the 2020 ticket in 2019. Then she started debating, and talking, and showing her smug and obnoxious personality. Her unimpressive background started coming out too, how she rose to prominence in California by being California political boss Willie Brown’s mistress, how she was a law-and-order, anti-woke prosecutor until she ran for Senator, and suddenly morphed into a radical progressive to get elected.

Harris’s candidacy didn’t even make it to 2020 because her polling sank to Titanic levels the more the public listened to her. The Democratic field was hardly a stellar batch (which is how Joe Biden ended up as the nominee), but Harris impressed less than such stars as Andrew Yang and Amy Klobuchar. Tulsi Gabbard mopped the metaphorical floor with Kamala in the pre-New Hampshire primary debate.

Continue reading →