As longtime followers here know, I have critiqued the ethics advice offered by whomever was in charge of the Times Magazine “The Ethicist” column for years. By far, the best of these has been the current holder of the title, Kwame Anthony Appiah, a real ethicist who teaches teaches philosophy at N.Y.U. Thus his most recent descent into bias and rationalizations to answer a recent query was profoundly discouraging.

“Name Withheld”(of course) complained,

My daughters grew up in a very progressive household, they have embraced the opposite political side from me. My granddaughter hears all the talk in her family, and I feel sure she believes she is hearing the truth. One of my daughters also does not believe in the vaccine and did not have my granddaughter vaccinated. I do not discuss politics with them any longer. They get all their information from the internet and don’t read the mainstream press. The worst thing of all to me is that they believe the election was stolen.

She asks The Ethicist if it would be ethical to disinherit them for their evil beliefs (my words, nor hers, but clearly her meaning) and give her accumulated wealth to “a good cause.” The simple answer is two-fold: “Name Withheld”—can I call her NW for short?—can do whatever she wants with her estate. There is no obligation to pass on wealth to one’s children. However, slapping at them from beyond the grave because Mom was unsuccessful in indoctrinating them in her woke value system is inherently petty and mean-spirited, if she would not have wanted to do so as long as they expressed sufficient sympathy for abortion, the Green New Deal and science-based incursions on liberty. Continue reading →

I’m not mentioning this for sympathy, just full disclosure: a longtime problem tooth went bonkers last night, and I’ve been in agony ever since. Nothing works, I can’t sleep, and I am over-dosed with multiple drugs to no avail. So I’m not sure how this post is going to come out, though the tooth will, as soon as my dentist can clear his schedule. My dental woes are just one more little bonus from the lock-down. On the plus side, if all my teeth fall out, those masks will be a godsend...

1. “The View” does have its uses, I have to admit. The shrill spontaneous utterances of that collection of one-note partisans are revealing. For example, Ana Navarro, the fake Republican pundit favored by CNN because her predictable attacks on President Trump were treated as balance with the rest of CNN’s attacks on him, had this to say in rebuke of guest and minor Trump staffer Stephanie Griffin, who is now trying to get gigs by saying that she left the administration because she she “saw things” she “hated”:

“Four years later? After ‘there were good people on both sides,’ after the way he treated immigrants, after what he said about Mexicans, after hearing the sexual assault boasts on tape, after seeing him make fun of a disabled reporter? You need four years?”

Let’s see: a reference to one deceptive and debunked false narrative, three incidents before Trump was elected, and “the way he treated immigrants,” by which we can only assume she meant “Illegal immigrants,” and is therefore being dishonest,with “how he treated” standing in for “insisting that they don’t get away with breaking the law,” which is what we call “civilization.” That’s the core of the entire anti-Trump rage phenomenon: not substance, style and rhetoric. The first things that Navarro could think of had nothing to do with Trump’s policies or success in office. Thanks, Ana. Just as I thought.

2. At least she lies to Democrats too…Speaker Pelosi, speaking at the 2022 House Democratic Issues Conference, last week, channeled the Biden administration’s new “messaging” blaming Putin’s invasion for rising gas prices and inflation that began a year earlier, then said,

“Seventeen Nobel laureates in economics said that… that legislation [Build Back Better]does not increase inflation. It is non-inflationary because of the way it is written. So when we’re having this discussion, it’s important to dispel some of those who say, well, ‘Is the government spending’ — no, it isn’t. The government spending is doing the exact reverse, reducing the national debt. It is not inflationary.”

Even giving Pelosi the benefit of the doubt and assuming that she meant the deficit, not the debt, her assertion that the trillion dollar plus bill would save money is ludicrous. Despite “how it is written,” the Congressional Budget Office determined, in fact, that Biden’s languishing bill would add $367 billion to the national deficit over the next decade. Is it possible that Democrats believe their own lies?

3. Do these delicate female athletes realize they are setting back the progress of women’s equality by decades with this kind of self-indulgence? Naomi Osaka, the former No. 1 tennis star who started her fall to #78 on the pro tour by announcing that it was too stressful to have to answer post-match questions from reporters, broke down in tears at the BNP Paribas Open because a single unmannerly fan shouted, “Naomi, you suck!” First she demanded that the spectator be ejected, then wanted to take a mic and address the crowd mid-match. After she lost, Osaka again skipped her post-match news conference.

A male pro-athlete who had break-down over a single heckler in an overwhelmingly supportive crowd of spectators would be universally ridiculed, and deservedly so.

4. Ugh. I’ve got three more items, but I just can’t think straight. Waiting for some drugs…sorry!

I nearly included this post’s sub-title in the headline, but it was too long: “Gee, wouldn’t it be great if the United States had a trustworthy, objective and competent journalistic establishment that we could rely on for critical facts?”

We don’t have such an establishment, however.

Gabbard, the former Democratic member of Congress from Hawaii who acquired more delegates in her run for the Presidency in 2020 than Kamala Harris [insert inappropriate cackle here], is roundly detested by her own party and the mainstream news media (but I repeat myself) for refusing to follow party talking points and false narratives on a variety of issues. The latest in her political muckraking is a two-minute video posted to her Twitter account, in which she stated that there are 25 to 30 American-funded biological laboratories in Ukraine and called for an immediate ceasefire around them before an accident spreads dangerous pathogens.

Continue reading →

I didn’t foresee a this supplementary post being necessary after parts 1 and 2 a month ago. The evidence was overwhelming already that the Democratic Party was, with record-setting gall, accusing the Republicans in general and Donald Trump in particular of being an existential threat to democracy while their own party was deliberately undermining the Constitution. Part 2 listed 15 examples; it was far from complete. However, one of the more absurd examples, which I originally flagged in this earlier post, is apparently being seriously pursued.

Jonathan Turley caught us up in a column last week in The Hill.

Although the moldy oldie Equal Rights Amendment failed to be ratified by a sufficient number of states before the Congress-imposed deadline for doing so expired, Democrats want it to be declared the 28th Amendment to the Constitution anyway. Turley explains,

Continue reading →

This date in 1865 marked one of the great hypocrisies of all time. The Confederacy, back to the metaphorical wall and facing defeat, approved the use of black troops. Slaves were the last source of recruits left for the Confederacy, but forcing them to fight against their own interests was as cruel as it was illogical. One Southern politician asked, “What did we go to war for, if not to protect our property?” Another pointed out, “If slaves will make good soldiers, our whole theory of slavery is wrong.” Ya think?

Focused only on military survival, General Robert E. Lee’s brutal contribution to the debate was “We must decide whether slavery shall be extinguished by our enemies and the slaves be used against us, or use them ourselves.” At least Lee asked that the black soldiers who fought for the Confederacy be ensured their freedom, but the Confederate Congress’s bill authorizing black soldiers on March 13, 1865, did not include that feature.

1. What is the ethical reply to a Facebook comment like this? An old friend and nice guy weighed in on a Facebook thread entirely occupied by tunnel-visioned, knee-jerk progressives (like him) and launched by a fatuous comment about what a great leader Zalinsky is and how the U.S. has no similarly admirable political leaders. My friend wrote, “Biden’s doing a good job!” I had to wrestle my fingers to the ground. By what possible perspective could anyone of any political persuasion say that Biden is doing a “good job”? My friend isn’t especially political; he’s not lying: he must really think that, and, of course, all of the knee-jerks “liked” that assessment. I ultimately decided to let his statement go, and instead wrote that bravely refusing to accept defeat during an invasion and inspiring your nation is a narrow band of admirable leadership in a very specific kind of situation, but it doesn’t, by itself, make someone a “great leader.” Before the Russian attack, nobody thought of Zalinsky as a great leader. He has guts and principles, but there is more to leadership than that.

Continue reading →