Three Arrogant Pundits, One Crippling Delusion

The delusion is that the American people are stupid.

I easily could have written “hundreds of pundits” instead of three, but these three, CNN’s Michael Smerconish, often said to be the most fair and objective of CNN’s talking heads, which tells you something, the New York Times’ David Brooks, once an arrogant, pseudo-intellectual neocon conservative and now a fully indoctrinated Stockholm Syndrome progressive rationalizer, and Times guest Trump-basher Roger Rosenblatt, a writer of some note.

I read about Smerconish last night, and his assertion irritated me the most of all. His theory about why Harris lost and Trump won was based on what he calls “The Boomerang Effect,” “I don’t want it all distilled into this one sound bite or conclusion, but at the top of my list, I’ll say it that way … It’s like a parenting lesson. The more that you tell people what they can’t do, what’s intolerable, you must not do this, you should not do this, the more they’re going to rebel,” Smerconish said. “Maybe they would have ultimately come to their own conclusion and rejected Donald Trump. I don’t know. But I think that the constant browbeating and the combination of the media influence and the four indictments, one conviction, and showing that god-awful joke from Madison Square Garden a week in advance of the election on a loop — and I felt it, and I said it.” He went on, “I can’t sit here, Aiden, telling you, well, this is the way I called the election, but I definitely felt the potential for a boomerang effect, and I think that came true. I really do.”

Translation: “The American people are like children, and we superior intellects in the news media must lead them in such a way that the poor, ignorant, foolish dears think they are coming to their own conclusions.”

I was immediately reminded of song from the musical “The Fantastiks,” in which two father muse about the complexities of parenting. It’s called “Don’t Say No.” Sample lyrics:

“Why did the kids put beans in their ears?
No one can hear with beans in their ears.
After a while the reason appears.
They did it cause we said no.”

It never occurred to Smerconish, or any of the myriad other pundits who bias has made so stupid that they are useless, that the public, or enough of them to prove Abe right again, voted after correctly evaluating the issues, the choices offered to them and alternative courses for the nation going forward. No, they only voted for Trump because the Axis propaganda was too aggressive. After all, voting for Hitler is like putting beans in your ears.

Next up we have David Brooks. I’m sick of reading Brooks, who masks a simplistic view of politics with psychobabble that some might take and complex analysis. I have to give Ann Althouse a pointer for flagging his column titled ““Why We Got It So Wrong.” Ann writes, “If you were “so wrong” before, why would I look to you for right answers now?” Heh. She says she just skimmed it. I read the whole thing.

Continue reading

Dear Ashli: You Do Know That What You Are Advocating Is Pure Bigotry, Right?

The self-indicting that is arising from the 2024 Election Freakout has nicely exposed the hypocrisy behind the progressive masks of decency and virtue. Let’s listen to Ashli, the lovely young thing above, who has enthusiastically embraced the South Korean “4B Movement.”  The name ‘4B’ comes from the Korean words for four ‘Nos’: no heterosexual sex, no marriage, no children, and no relationships, all starting with the letter ‘b.’ Her journey is described in a revealing piece in the Daily Mail.

The brutal murder of a woman in a subway station by a man who reportedly said he was ‘sick of being ignored by women.’ sparked the ptotest by many Korean women against all men. That seems fair and logical. No, in fact it makes no sense at all, but it does to Ashli.  “Out of this tragedy, a wave of female anger turned into action. Women took control of their lives,” she writes. I’ve come to the conclusion that men can be dangerous. That’s why, two years ago at the age of 34, I chose to disengage from men entirely.

She gives her reasons. “I knew so many women who were hurt by the men they loved and trusted. Men they vowed to love and who vowed to love them. Men they slept next to at night.” Then, “the overturning of Roe cemented everything I already knew. Five justices—four of them men—decided we didn’t deserve control over our own bodies. The new MAGA Republican Party, with its hyper-masculine, power-hungry grip, cheered it on.”

Continue reading

Trump Shakes Things Up! Friday Open Forum…

By the time you comment here (on what ever ethics matters move you), James Woods is like to have been nominated as Secretary of Transportation, and Hulk Hogan as Secretary of Commerce. Interesting times….

Jerry Lee Lewis was amazing, wasn’t he?

Confronting My Biases, Episode 15: Pete Hegseth’s Tats (Corrected and Revised)

I just saw the photo above on the web.

I’m sorry, I know its a generational thing, I know, I know.

But I cannot stop myself from believing that anyone who gets themselves tattooed like that is an idiot. I always will.

The idea of the United States having the Secretary of Defense with those tattoos is almost too jarring for me to bear. Some are writing that the chest tattoo is a white supremacy symbol. Is it?

This is a big correction: I was hit with two equivalent photos claiming that was Matt Gaetz, and I posted this originally about the ex-Congressman. Gaetz and Hegseth do look a little alike.

For some reason, the idea of an Attorney General being self-branded like that bothers me a lot more than having a Secretary of Defense with them underneath his suit. Hegseth fought “infidels” in the Middle East. Heck, maybe those tattoos will endear him to the military. You know, like if he had a tattoo reading, “Indiannapolis.”

Ethics Alarms regrets the error (kudos to Jg in SF for flagging it.

But the bias remains.

And I’m afraid to think about what Gaetz’s tats look like...

Oh Look! Now That The Axis Has Been Slapped Down By A Majority In An Election, The Washington Post Is Factchecking Nancy Pelosi About Trump!

Wait, I thought it was Donald Trump who lied all the time?

I pay as little attention to Nancy Pelosi as possible, and missed her ridiculous statement after the election, “I don’t think we were clear enough by saying fewer people came in under President Joe Biden than came under Donald Trump.” The Deranged , currently trying to get through life with their heads exploding constantly, will believe just about anything Democrats say in denial of their accountability for Harris’s election faceplant (after all, Trump voters are all racist, sexist, ignorant garbage), and dozens of lies were spread on their behalf during the campaign without factcheckers raising an eyebrow.

But that Pelosi nonsense was apparently too much. It was too much even after the usual “He/She didn’t say what she said or if she did she meant something else” squad, which reliably follows a Democrat’s whopper as reliably as the little man with mustache, the broom and the trash can who followed the Parade of History that began the “Mr. Peabody” segments on “Rocky and Bullwinkle,” rushed to rescue the ex-Speaker. She didn’t mean illegal border-crossers, she mean those deported,” they said. Well, not deported, maybe, but arrested.

Continue reading

Stay Classy, Secret Service!

No wonder Trump has nearly been assassinated twice.

Koryeah Dwanyen, in her self-published book “Undercover Heartbreak: A Memoir of Trust and Trauma”revelas that she succumbed to the alluring pick-up line “Let’s have sex in Michelle Obama’s bathroom!” and travelled to Hawaii with a Secret Service agent she calls“Dale.” “No one will know. If anything, I’m the one who could get in trouble,” she quotes Dale in her memoir. “Like a mile-high club!” he allegedly told her.

And she did have sex in the former First Lady’s bathroom. The story has been confirmed by the Secret Service, according to ABC News. (“Dale” is now otherwise employed.) Meanwhile, Dwanyen says she submitted to his bathroom fantasy because she was in love with the agent. She discovered later that he was married.

Imagine that! Someone assigned to protect a former First Lady and who secretly uses her bathroom as a secret love den would lie. What is the world coming to?

After “Dale” came clean about his marital status, bathroom buddy Koryeah became patriotic and reported the agent to his superiors. He also had revealed classified information to her.

I think Trump should appoint Stormy Daniels to run the Secret Service.

A Super Nelson For These Smug, Obnoxious, Arrogant People Made Stupid and Unbearable By Bias

I can’t resist. I’m sorry. It’s unprofessional of me. But I am so sick of reading the whining, caterwauling, insults and ignorance on my Facebook feed, and this video hit me at exactly the wrong time.

It speaks for itself…

Pssst! MSNBC! Loyalty Is An Ethical Value…

Waiting for my oven to preheat, I watched a bit of MSNBC this afternoon. They were discussing Trump’s early appointments, and the talking heads and panelists must have used the term “loyal” close to a hundred times, all with the tone of voice one would expect uttering the word, “diseased.” The fact that Trump’s appointments suggest that he is only interested in departments heads and advisors who will be “loyal” to him and dedicated to advancing his agenda was relayed to the MSNBC audience as if the panel had discovered that all the individuals named so far are lizard people. Because, as we all know, other Presidents have reveled in appointing office holders who hated their guts.

Continue reading

The Academic Cheating Problem: It’s Not Just About Education

The Chronicle of Higher Education has a troubling, if not unexpected report, “Cheating Has Become Normal: Faculty members are overwhelmed, and the solutions aren’t clear.” It begins with an anecdote that would be funny if it weren’t so apocalyptic. A professor caught a student cheating, and warned him that the next time this happened, he would be failed in the course. The student wrote an abject apology, full of contrition and assurances. Then his next assignment was found to be composed by an AI bot. Then, just for giggles, the prof asked the same bot to compose a letter of apology for a student who had been caught cheating. The bot produced exactly the apology the student had submitted, word for word.

From the article:

Continue reading

Comment of the Day: “Wait, WHAT??? Unethical Quote of the Month: NPR CEO Katherine Maher”

Let me begin by thanking commenter Edward for tracking down the source of the Maher quote, which at the time I posted I could not track, and my source, Elon Musk, didn’t help any by not bothering to include it in his post. It is the Ted Talk above, made when Maher was CEO at Wikipedia.

Not to leave you in any unnecessary suspense, I hate her talk with the fury of a thousand typhoons. Any time I hear the “you have your truth and I have mine” New Age blather, I tune out, spit three times, and have a stiff drink. It is a cornerstone of woke ideology and subjective ethics, and I say to hell with it.

Nonetheless, Extradimensional Cephalopod does his usual meticulously fair and open-minded response, this time to my question of whether the statement, “I think our reverence for the truth might have become a bit of a distraction that is preventing us from finding consensus and getting important things done,” could be justified. He does as good a job as I can imagine anyone doing, but I’m not buying. Before realizing I should post this as a COTD, I replied to EC’s post on the original essay’s thread; I’ll re-post it following his (its?) Comment of the Day on the post, “Wait, WHAT??? Unethical Quote of the Month: NPR CEO Katherine Maher”…

***

“…what possible context could justify it?”

I can’t guarantee that Maher meant what she said in a benign sense, but such a sense does indeed exist.

Allow me to rephrase the statement in question:

Before: “I think our reverence for the truth might have become a bit of a distraction that is preventing us from finding consensus and getting important things done.”

After: “I think our obsession with forcing everyone to agree with our interpretations of the available evidence interfered with us finding enough relevant points of agreement that we could establish mutually acceptable approaches on important issues.”

The confusion lies in the conflation of “truth” to mean three different things:

Continue reading