Tag Archives: ethics

Biden Supporters

Posted on by
Reply

Team Save America tried to hold a rally in San Francisco last Saturday, and they were attacked, many beaten, one had a tooth knocked out by the Leftist gang of thugs known as antifa.

They planned to rally at United Nations Plaza before moving the protest to Twitter’s headquarters a few blocks away. But the event quickly devolved into a shouting match and violence as hundreds of counterprotesters stormed the scene.

As Philip Anderson, an organizer of Team Save America’s protest and the one whose tooth was knocked out, said,

This is what happens when you lose free speech. This is what happens, America. This is what our country is turning into.

This is what Progressive-Democratic Party Presidential candidate Joe Biden refuses to denounce.

This is the violent Leftist group that Biden refuses to denounce.

Press Integrity

Posted on by
Reply

Here are some examples.

ABC hosted a townhall Q&A of Progressive-Democratic Party Presidential candidate Joe Biden last Thursday, a session in which the network carefully misidentified at least two audience questioners.

One of the questioners at the ABC-hosted event was Nathan Osburn…. Osburn specifically worked for the Office of Public Affairs at the Commerce Department under the Obama-Biden administration and at the Small Business Administration.

Never mind that. As Osburn was asking his question, ABC, in its identifying screamer said he worked in communications.

Mieke Haeck was another questioner. The network claimed she was a physical therapist in State College, PA.

Never mind that she’s married to

Ezra Nanes, a high-profile Democrat in Pennsylvania who in 2018 ran a campaign challenging Republican state Senate Majority Leader Jake Corman [and that] Nanes is currently an at-large member of the Centre County Democratic Committee….

Or that State College is in Centre County.

NBC pulled the same misidentification stunt at an earlier Biden townhall. That session was explicitly advertised by NBC has having an audience of “undecided voters.” Peter Gonzalez and Ismael Llano were questioners.

Both Gonzalez and Llano, however, were featured in an MSNBC segment in August to explain why they support Biden.

Yeah, that’s integrity.

Hypocrisy

Posted on by
Reply

Progressive-Democrats are accusing Republicans of that as they move to confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court “in a Presidential election year.” Typical of them is this bit by Congressman Gerry Connolly (D, VA):

I’m focused on the hypocrisy of the Republicans who promised, Lindsey Graham [R, SC, and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman] being number one, his own words, said they wouldn’t do this.

What Connolly is carefully ignoring is that Graham, subsequent to that commitment and in response to the then-Judge Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court confirmation hearings, said in no uncertain terms, that as a result of Progressive-Democrat (my term) behavior during those hearings, all bets were off.

What Connolly also is carefully ignoring is that his Progressive-Democrat confreres on the Judicial Committee during Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings utterly refused to engage in a serious confirmation process. Those worthies instead executed a deliberate character assassination campaign in an attempt to destroy the man; their effort against Kavanaugh made Progressive-Democrat treatments of Robert Bork, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito look absolutely gentle.

It’s not Republicans who are being hypocritical in this manufactured kerfuffle.

Revised Rules

Posted on by
Reply

Jack Dorsey has them for his Twitter. In response to the blowup over his (and Mark Zuckerberg’s over at Facebook) decision to censor the New York Post‘s reporting on emails found on a laptop allegedly belonging to Hunter Biden and seeming to indicate connections among Hunter, his business efforts in Ukraine and the People’s Republic of China, and his father Progressive-Democratic Party Presidential candidate Joe Biden—or more likely in response to the pending subpoena compelling his sworn testimony in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee next week regarding his censorship—Dorsey had his legal, policy and trust & safety lead, Vijaya Gadde, announce some unspecified changes. Dorsey also said through her, though, that

All other Twitter Rules will still apply to the posting of or linking to hack materials, such as our rules against posting…synthetic and manipulated media….

In other words, Dorsey still will censor obvious satire and political ads because he’s too lazy to think about what he’s actually looking at. Or because he assumes his customers are too droolingly imbecilic to understand what they’re looking at.

After this, Dorsey claimed to have withdrawn all blocks; he would simply attach a “context” label to the tweets and retweets.

That “changes” turn out to be untrue. The New York Post still is locked out of its own account unless and until it withdraws—withdraws—its tweets regarding its prior two articles.

QOTD

Posted on by
Reply

Or maybe it’s the quote of the week. Or the month. Or the year.

It seems that

[a]t least 44 schools in San Francisco could see their names changed, as officials believe some were named after those with potential connections to slavery, genocide, and colonization, according to a report on Thursday.
The San Francisco School Names Advisory Committee researched school names and identified certain ones for renaming.

The move isn’t sitting well with the folks and their children who will have to live with the outcome of this move. Here’s one concerned parent:

Principals are devoting resources to this. We’re not actually helping disadvantaged children by changing the name of the school they can’t attend.

Unfortunately, though, this is typical of the vapidly saccharine pseudo-policies of the virtue-signaling Left. Worse, it’s all the Left seems to have; there’s nothing substantive or practical to their claims.