celebrities

A Kaufman For The Royals! [Updated]

/ Jack Marshall / 17 Comments

These people are the most trivial, juvenile, time-wasting people in the long, stupid history of celebrities. Brits everywhere should hide their heads under paper bags for allowing them to encroach on our consciousness when there are sock draws desperately needing order and curling championships to watch.

Today we are told the shocking “news” that Kate Middleton celebrated her birthday a few days ago on January 9 and apparently Prince Harry and Meghan Markle didn’t wish her a happy birthday! One source “somewhat dramatically tells Rob Shuter’s ShuterScoop, ‘Not a peep. It’s deliberate. They’re making it clear they’re done. It’s a line in the sand.'”

Continue reading →

A Confederacy of Dunces at the Golden Globes

/ Jack Marshall / 12 Comments

The sock drawer isn’t small enough not to keep me from watching the annual Golden Globes broadcast, the parade of awards from people I don’t know or respect to performers I’ve barely heard of for shows I haven’t seen. Nonetheless, Hollywood (and others) managed to disgrace itself once again, reminding us that the artists who make our mass entertainment have the critical thinking skills of paper clips.

Once again the “Hollywood progs” (the name used by critics too genteel to call them “Hollywood assholes”) promoted the misguided latest woke cause. Last year it was the anti-Israel position insisting that nation should stop fighting Hamas and let the terrorists re-stock for the next massacre. This year, stars were wearing the fatuous anti-ICE pin, “Be Good.” Yeah, let’s all demand open borders, interfere with law enforcement, use our cars to block I.C.E operations, resist arrest, nearly run down and officer and get shot! Oh-oh, Sidney Wang is demanding a word…

Yeah, we know, Inspector.

We also know now that the late neighborhood open-borders fan was not good, as she was a contributor to Black Lives Matter, signature significance for someone who supports anti-white racism, lies (Michael Brown was murdered, you know!), riots, anti-law enforcement violence, dishonest news and scammers.

But never mind! The ACLU, among other principle-free organizations including communist groups, funded the creation and distribution of that tiny salute to idiocy. Talk about minds: the ACLU has genuinely lost theirs, along with any claim to respectability and credibility. The organization used to stand for free speech. Now it is deliberately using its reputation and resources to mislead the public into thinking Good was engaging in it by blocking law enforcement and defying the law.

Continue reading →

Ethics Observations On The Dionne Quintuplets’ Resentment

/ Jack Marshall / 4 Comments

The last of the famous Dionne Quintuplets died last week. Annette Dionne, who seems to have been the strongest of the five identical sisters from the very beginning, was 91. The New York Times has an obituary that is also an excellent feature on their unusual lives (Gift link!)—this is the kind of thing the Times still does well. There isn’t a single slap at President Trump anywhere, at least that I noticed.

The article begins by noting that Annette, like all of her sisters, “resented being exploited as part of a global sensation.” I get it: the five girls were celebrities from the second they were born, and their fame was such that they never really escaped it: thus the last surviving quint being deemed worthy of a Times obituary more than 60 years after her birth. But resenting something that any objective analysis would find unavoidable is not just pointless, it’s unfair. In this case, the resentment was unfair to the quints’ parents and the public.

In 1934, the birth of surviving quintuplets in Ontario, Canada was considered, justifiably, a medical miracle. All five of them together weighed only 13 pounds, 6 ounces. Yes, in a way they were freaks and treated as such, extraordinarily cute little freaks. Medical miracles give people hope; they suggest that the world is getting smarter, safer, more beneficent. This miracle happened in the pit of the Great Depression, when celebrities like Babe Ruth and Shirley Temple became icons because they made Americans forget their troubles.

To the girls’ parents, Oliva and Elzire Dionne, the arrival of five babies to a family living in poverty was a looming catastrophe. The parents and five children already lived in a run-down farmhouse lit by kerosene and serviced by an outhouse. The new babies were nursed on water and corn syrup until the family started receiving breast milk donations. The fact that the public was so interested in the quintuplets was a blessing that saved the family from disaster.

They were indeed exploited. The parents for a time surrendered custody of the girls and they were cared for by a government-appointed guardian, the doctor who had delivered them. The were housed and cared for by the doctor and a staff at “Quintland,” where they were displayed several times a day on a balcony as 6,000 spectators watched them through one-way glass.

Continue reading →

Snopes Rules That Irrelevant Cher Did Not Deliver a Crushing Retort To Karoline Leavitt For Calling Her Irrelevant

/ Jack Marshall / 7 Comments

Slow day at Snopes, mayhap?

Such worthies as “The View’s” fake republican Ana Navarro spread a story about how Trump paid liar Karoline Leavitt referred to ancient ex-pop star, ex-actress Cher as “irrelevant” only to be slapped down by Sonny Bono’s muse thusly:

Well, snap! Take that, fascist bitch!

The story went viral on social media, with other celebrities celebrating Cher’s comeback, at least of a verbal nature. But it didn’t happen. Snopes—not that the site is trustworthy either—determined the fake quotes from both Leavitt and Cher originated in an AI-authored article appearing on a website indicating that its owners resided in Vietnam.

So desperate are the Trump Deranged for moral victories that they must stoop to cheering on fake triumphs by antediluvian woke warriors nobody under the age of 45 is likely to remember. For Cher is irrelevant, and has been for more than two decadee. Leavitt wouldn’t bother to call her irrelevant because she is irrelevant, just as the fake exchange would be irrelevant even if it occurred. This means that Snopes declaring the tale false is also irrelevant.

As is this post, come to think of it…

Apparently a washed-up star can be considered relevant if she is believed to be sufficiently opposed to the President and his supporters. Once again, as with Nicki Minaj, I must ask, “Who cares what Cher thinks about Karoline Leavitt?”

I view this episode worthy of an Ethics Alarms Kaufmann. “A Kaufman” is applied to matters of controversy so inconsequential as to be unworthy of attention or indignation. George S. Kaufman,  celebrated wit and playwright, was on a TV panel show when singer Eddie Fisher ( father of Carrie) asked advice from the panel because desirable women were refusing to date him because of his youth. Kaufman replied,

“Mr. Fisher, on Mount Wilson there is a telescope that can magnify the most distant stars to twenty-four times the magnification of any previous telescope. This remarkable instrument was unsurpassed in the world of astronomy until the development and construction of the Mount Palomar telescope.  The Mount Palomar telescope is an even more remarkable instrument of magnification. Owing to advances and improvements in optical technology, it is capable of magnifying the stars to four times the magnification and resolution of the Mount Wilson telescope. Mr. Fisher, if you could somehow put the Mount Wilson telescope inside the Mount Palomar telescope, you still wouldn’t be able to see my interest in your problem.”

For Eddie Fishers problem, substitute what Cher might say after Karoline Leavitt called her irrelevant. Even in her prime, Cher’s political views should have carried no more weight than the average Starbuck’s barista. Now, they are not even worthy of a Snopes factcheck.

Stupid Cognitive Dissonance Tricks: Who Cares What Nicki Minaj Thinks? [Corrected]

/ Jack Marshall / 18 Comments

Nicki Minaj, the most successful female rapper in music history (a distinction in my book that ranks right up there with Eddie Gaedel being the only midget to play Major League Baseball), made a surprise appearance at the Turning Point USA AmericaFest convention, walking out hand-in-hand with CEO Erika Kirk, to close the conservative organization’s annual event in Phoenix, Arizona yesterday. The conservative media and blogosphere was ecstatic. (The Axis media was shocked and horrified.)

Minaj is a woman, black, and not native-born: she’s supposed to hate Trump, MAGA, conservatives, Republican, the whole basket of deplorables. But there she was, gushing on stage, “I have the utmost respect and admiration for our President. I don’t know if he even knows this, but he’s given so many people hope,” adding that Trump was “handsome,” “dashing” and a good “role model.”

So what? The news media presuming that Nicki Minaj’s opinion on anything should matter one iota to anyone is endorsing the fatuous delusion of the Harris campaign, which paid out millions to get endorsement from celebrities who have no policy credibility whatsoever. Nevertheless, the Right is celebrating Minaj’s endorsement for the same reason Democrats became Liz Cheney fans: these are Cognitive Dissonance Scale games, the most cynical kind imaginable. Minaj figures to have a fan base made up of demographics that tend to favor Democrats, but cognitive dissonance theory dictates that if someone high in their estimation embraces the MAGA cult, Trump, Turning Point and the rest will be forcefully pulled up the scale, maybe even into positive territory!

(Of course, the scale also dictates that Minaj’s popularity will take a major hit as well.)

Continue reading →

The Sec. of Transportation Tells Kim Kardashian That She’s an Irresponsible Ignorance-Spreading Fool. Good!

/ Jack Marshall / 11 Comments

In an episode of the reality show “The Kardashians” (My god, is that still on?) Uber Kardashian Kim, the only one of the breed who earned her celebrity (with a sex tape and a huge derriere), told actress Sarah Paulson that she had watched interviews with Buzz Aldrin, who was on the Apollo 11 mission with Neil Armstrong and the second person to walk on the moon, and they convinced her that the moon landing was a government hoax.

“I don’t think we did. I think it was fake,” the Kimster announced. “I’ve seen a few videos on Buzz Aldrin talking about how it didn’t happen. He says it all the time now, in interviews.” Does anyone know what the hell she’s babbling about? The last time I heard about Aldrin in relation to the moonwalk conspiracy theory, he punched a guy in the face for claiming it was true.

Then Kardashian repeated a trope of the ancient conspiracy theory: “There’s no gravity on the moon. Why is the flag blowing?” I view that statement all by itself as signature significance: anyone who says it once is too gullible to be let outside without a keeper, and anyone who says it publicly is an idiot. The “mystery” can be answered by viewing the archived videos or by 3 seconds of googling. Who goes on TV and asserts a non-fact that anyone, including her, can prove false in a trice?

This time, however, big guns were trained on the specific idiot. Sean Duffy, the US Transportation Secretary and acting administrator of NASA, rebutted the whatever-she-is on X. He wrote: “Yes, Kim Kardashian, we’ve been to the moon before … Six times! And even better, NASA Artemis is going back under the leadership of [President Trump]. We won the last space race and we will win this one too.”

Madison, Wis, bloggress Ann Althouse, in one of her “it’s not the topic, it’s the tangents” posts, asks,

“Why is a government official calling out a private citizen who expresses interest in a conspiracy theory? We’re Americans. We have our conspiracy theories. Keep your government nose out of our business. You’re only giving more ammunition to the conspiracy theorists. Why stick your neck out to deny what isn’t true? You’re making it more fun to believe the theory!”

Ann is evoking the “Streisand Effect” with her “You’re only giving more ammunition to the conspiracy theorists.” She’s wrong, maybe even at an Ethics Dunce level. This conspiracy is hardly unknown: there was even a movie about it, and I have encountered moonwalk skeptics periodically ever since the event. “Why is a government official calling out a private citizen who expresses interest in a conspiracy theory?” Because, Ann, celebrities are not “private citizens.” They are public citizens; they make their millions by being famous and by appearing, speaking and misbehaving in public. More Americans by far know who Kim Kardashian is than who know who Sean Duffy is. A disturbing number of Americans, maybe even a majority, believe that being a celebrity (and appearing on TV) indicates virtue, wisdom and intelligence. Celebrity culture helped get Donald Trump elected President. Doesn’t Ann Althouse understand that? Hasn’t she ever heard the rejoinder, “If you’re so smart, why aren’t you rich?”

Continue reading →

Fan Ethics: The Diane and Joe Saga [Corrected]

/ Jack Marshall / 22 Comments

Guest column by AM Golden

[From your host: This scary, poignant guest post sat un-noticed in my in-box for many weeks. I would have posted it immediately if I hadn’t missed it. Regular commenter AM Golden paints a vivid picture of how celebrity worship, then pursuit, can lead down dark alleys and perhaps to tragedy. At the end of this cautionary tale, AM writes, “Joe can obviously handle this situation himself.” I’m not sure it’s so obvious. Rebecca Shaeffer couldn’t handle it. Jody Foster didn’t handle it sufficiently wee to prevent her fan from nearly killing Ronald Reagan. John Lennon couldn’t handle it. Among AM’s provocative questions at the end of this case study is what ethical obligations an observer has to try to persuade someone in the throes of a dangerous obsession to change course, back off, or seek help. My reflex instinct is to say there is such an obligation, as there always is when one is in a unique position to prevent harm and fix a serious problem. That is a far easier position to defend in the abstract than in reality.–JM]

About 18 months ago, I made a comment about the importance of one’s Good Name – one’s reputation – that was honored with a Comment of the Day.   Among the stories related in that comment was the recent crushing experience of a fan I called Diane, who had a less-than stellar encounter with her favorite actor whom I dubbed “Joe Darling”. 

It seems that Diane had been sending Joe emails through the public contact option on his website.  Many emails.  She had also been sending gifts to his private residence: All unsolicited; all unanswered.  This had gone on for three years before she met him at a pop culture convention.  Her thinking seems to have been that he would have told her if he wanted her to stop.  She’d also ordered a Cameo from him that had gone unfulfilled. I’d admitted back then that I had gotten vibes from her social media comments that she was a little fixated on Joe, who by all accounts a happily married man.  It had never occurred to me that she had been contacting him directly. 

When she went to his table at the convention, he figured out who she was.  He told her that he considered her behavior borderline stalking and that it needed to stop or he would take further action.  Mortified, she apologized and assured him she would leave him alone.  She admitted online that she feels like she ruins everything.

Admittedly, I felt sorry for her.  No fan likes these kinds of stories.  They reflect poorly on all of us.  I also felt that she had probably overlooked warning signs along the way that would have spared her such embarrassment.   Could there have been a misunderstanding?  Curious, I looked over her public social media page.  Sure enough, there was enough evidence there to indict her as an obsessed fan and a particularly obtuse one. Her behavior since then has not changed my opinion.

Continue reading →

Unethical Quote of the Month, or “People Really Want to Vote For Someone Like This To Be President?”

/ Jack Marshall / 10 Comments

Yes, it’s Michelle Obama. Here’s the insufferable quote “explaining” her boycotting of the Trump inauguration, pointer to Ann Althouse, who pays attention to podcasts by celebrities like Mrs. Barack (me, I have sock drawers to keep):

“So I’m at this stage in life where I have to define my life on my terms for the first time. So what are those terms? And going to therapy just to work all that out. Like, what happened that 8 years that we were in the, the White House? What did that do to me — internally, my soul?… And going through therapy, you know, is… unlearning some of those messages that I’ve been tell… saying to myself and then trying to actively practice something different to rewire those neurons in my head…. [M]y decision to skip the inauguration… people couldn’t believe that I was saying no for any other reason — they had to assume, that my marriage was falling apart. You know, it’s like while I’m here really trying to own my life and intentionally practice making the choice that was right for me, and it took everything in my power to not do the thing that was right or that was, was that that was perceived as right but do the thing that was right for me. That was a hard thing for me to do. I had to basically trick myself out of it. And it started with not having anything to wear. I mean, I had affirmatively — because I’m always prepared for any funeral, anything I have. I walk around with the right dress, I travel with clothes, just in case something pops off. So I was like, if I’m not going to do this thing, I gotta tell my team: I don’t even want to have a dress ready. Because it’s so easy to just say, let me do the right thing.”

Right…huh?

What an insufferable, narcissistic, arrested adolescent bore. She had the privilege of living in the White House and having the unearned status and honor of being treated as a national figure and icon, despite no personal achievements that warranted such celebrity other than marrying the right guy. As a former First Lady, Michelle has few obligations, but one of them is to provide a unifying example by appearing in a non-partisan role at certain traditional ceremonies and functions, a President’s inauguration being an obvious one. She has parlayed her White House stay into untold riches, and the very least she could do to earn her keep is to show up (which, as Woody Allen has pointed out, is 80% of success in life). Instead we get this New Agey empty “like” blather.

Idiots in Space [Corrected]

/ Jack Marshall / 34 Comments
@katyperry

Today’s reminder that there is something bigger than me guiding my journey. Love, Feather/Tortoise 🪶🐢

♬ original sound – Katy Perry

Blue Origin (NOT Space X!) shot singer Katy Perry into space today—or yesterday, I really don’t care— and unfortunately, she will be coming back, or is she back already? (See previous comment.)

There are a lot of videos up now with pop star Perry making moronic observations about her trip. She will be accompanies by a slightly less flagrant idiot and a far less influential one, Gayle King, Oprah’s <cough> galpal. (Althouse features another one of Katy’s deep thoughts videos.)

Why are we—anyone— sending celebrity idiots into space? All this does is encourage weak minds to consider them worth listening to when they are not. There must be easily a million Americans whose journey “to the stars” would convey more long and short term benefits on our society.

Celebrity Ethics: Scarlett Johansson’s Manifesto

/ Jack Marshall / 18 Comments

For some mysterious reason, Daily Caller reporter Leena Nasir felt compelled to attack Hollywood actress Scarlett Johansson for her statements regarding fans who approach her when she is in public but not in a performing capacity.

“Scarlett Johansson put her arrogance on full display by issuing an unhinged statement about her celebrity status,” the indignant writer declared in an “Editorial.” “Clearly setting her bar as low as it can go, she casually blurted the selfish comments during the interview for her In Style cover story,” Nasir continued. “Johansson launched into a self-indulgent display of arrogance…I don’t think Johansson has a lot to worry about anymore. The people who did follow her career have likely just been turned away. It’s hard to imagine fans will care much about her anymore.”

Wow, two uses of “anymore” within three sentences. When I do that, I sentence myself to remedial writing exercises.

But back to Scarlett: what did the acclaimed actress tell the interviewer to justify such enmity from The Daily Caller? This:

Continue reading →