David French and the Syria Bombing

 

David French (image from article about him on wikipedia) is a political commentator. He writes for National Review among other outlets. He is a lawyer by training and served on active duty in Iraq during Desert Storm as a Judge Advocate.

He is noted for being an anti Trump Conservative.

 

Back on April 12, 2018, he warned that bombing Syria without Congressional Authorization would be imprudent and unconstitutional.  Then President Trump ordered bombing of Syria the next day and the bombing was

carried out on April 14, 2018. This was after a Syrian chemical bomb attack on civilians.

In 2021, he praised President Biden for bombing Syria despite their being no Congressional Authorization. 

 

Personally, I think there is a good case to be made that the 2018 bombing was unconstitutional but similar actions have been carried out by a number of Presidents over the past 50 years, so even if unconstitutional, it is more or less SOP.  

More to the point, is French being hypocritical?  French's only defense here is that he is OK with unconstitutional bombing as long as it is 'prudent' and in that case it deserves 'praise'.  That defense is so implausible that I discount it and judge him a hypocrite.  

Similar 'Trump bombing was wrong but Biden's is fine' has been made by other people. My favorite of this genre was by Amy Siskind (a former Wall Street finance type, now a leftist writer) who said that since Biden didn't issue a mean tweet to go with the bombing, it was OK (I can't link to it since she removed the tweet after it was ridiculed - image is from a screen shot by, SirajAHashm, a critic of Siskind).

 

 French's 2018 tweet is here.

French's 2021 tweet is here.

Hashm's tweet with Siskind's tweet captured is here.

Jamie Raskin 2017 opponent of Congressional Election confirmation is now impeachment manager

 

Jamie Raskin is a US Representative for Maryland's 8th Congressional District. It is one of the most obviously politically drawn, a.k.a., Gerrymandered, districts. I live in MD's 6th Congressional District, just outside the 8th which is also Gerrymandered but less so and new district lines are to be drawn in 2021 so I might be in a new district next year.

Back in 2017, Raskin sought to challenge the Electoral College Vote and the Congressional confirmation of that vote.

Now in 2021, Raskin is one of the managers of the impeachment of former President Trump because, among other things, Trump sought to challenge the Electoral College Vote and the Congressional confirmation of that vote.

Is this hypocrisy?

The difference between the two cases is not qualitative and if that were the only criterion, Raskin would be hypocritical. However the difference between the two cases is massive in a quantitative sense. Raskin's anti Electoral College activity was limited to a few days, lower keyed than Trump's comments and not tweeted to millions of his followers over a period of several weeks.  

So I'll say Raskin is a hypocrite but minimally so.

 

Regarding this issue, information on Raskin in 2017 is here and here.

Pirate Hypocrisy

   

Jamie Goodall is an historian. She authored an op ed in the Washington Post. It was published the Friday before the Superbowl. 

The op ed contains her opinion that that calling the Tampa NFL team the Buccaneers (their logo is the first image) is
bad because,

 "...it takes these murderous thieves who did terrible things — like locking women and children in a burning church — and makes them a symbol of freedom and adventure, erasing their wicked deeds from historical memory. These were men (and women) who willingly participated in murder, torture and the brutal enslavement of Africans and Indigenous peoples...."

The second image is this same Jamie Goodall with a tatoo of a sexy female pirate.  Her pirate is quite friendly compared with the team's logo.

Perhaps she got the tatoo and then changed her mind but didn't get the tatoo removed because it costs a lot and is painful.  Other than that this seems hypocritical to me, although it also seems more idiotic than hypocritical.

 

Op ed in the Washington Post is here.

Article on the subject is here.

Snow Travel Hypocrisy

 I don't get too many hypocrisy related weather posts.

New York City has a major snowstorm going on today (up to 2 feet).

Governor Andrew Cuomo went on TV, radio, etc. and told everybody to stay off the road.

Then he got in his car and drove to New York City.

This would be plain hypocrisy except for, first, the presumption that Cuomo's instructions do not apply to emergencies and second that his presence in New York City constitutes an emergency.  I'm OK on the first point. On the second point, it seems to me a truly ridiculous premise.

However, it is possible Cuomo is so detached from reality that he believes this.

Thus I'll call it probable hypocrisy.

 

Story is here.

Biden and Executive Orders

 

Appearing on NBC in October 2020, then former VP Joe Biden said, "You can't Legislate through Executive Orders, this is not a dictatorship..."

In the first few days of his administration, now POTUS Joe Biden issued 30 Executive Orders, more than any President had ever done in their first week.

Is this hypocrisy?

My answer is 'No' or at least 'not yet' because we don't know how many total executive orders Biden will issue or how extensive they will be.

The comment about executive orders appears at the end of this video.

Comparing Biden and others on Executive Orders in first week from this website:

• President Joe Biden: 22 executive orders in first week
• President Donald Trump: 4 executive orders in first week
• President Barack Obama: 5 executive orders in first week
• President George W. Bush: 0 executive orders in first week
• President Bill Clinton: 2 executive orders in first week
• President George Bush Sr: 1 executive order in first week
• President Ronald Reagan: 0 executive orders in first week

 

As of recent calculation, the leaders in total executive orders are-

FDR: 3721

Wilson: 1803

among recent Presidents-

GW Bush: 291

Obama: 276

Trump: 220

 

These numbers come from here. 

2020 Global Warming Policy Forum Award for Climate Hypocrisy goes to President Xi Jinping

 

These are not my awards. I had nothing to do with it.

However, it is interesting that an NGO is devoting space to this issue.

The winner for 2020 was President Xi Jinping of the PR of China.  From 2000 to 2018, the PRC roughly tripled its carbon footprint while producing five and ten and twenty and 40 year carbon reduction plans.

The "Emmas" are named for the 2019 winner, actress Emma Thompson (born in 1959, she portrayed Professor Sybill Trelawney in three Harry Potter movies) who took first class jet round trip to attend a global warming related event and after some back and forth actually admitted it was somewhat hypocritical. 

 

I am not going to evaluate either award as I don't really know the criteria used by the Global Warming Policy Forum (GPWF).

 

 

 

GWPF announcement of its 2019 award winner.

GWPF announcement of its 2020 award winner.

Vaccine Hypocrisy or Was It

 

In September 2020 both former VP Biden (currently POTUS elect Biden) and Senator Harris (currently VPOTUS elect Harris) gave encouragement to an anti Covid19 vaccine movement.

In each case, their exact words contained caveats and conditionals never actually saying the Covid19 vaccine would be dangerous. But they certainly got some people to infer that. How many is anyone's guess.

Both took the vaccine shortly after it became available; Biden on December 21, 2020 , Harris on December 29, 2020.

Because of the caveats and conditionals, I am not assigning this as a case of hypocrisy.

It was, however, pretty irresponsible and there is an element of the population that is, to this day, anti vaccine. An example of that is the pharmacist in Wisconsin who on December 26, 2020, intentionally ruined several hundred doses of the vaccine because he thought the vaccine was dangerous. Whether he thought so because of Biden and/or Harris will likely not be known.

Harris article is here.

Biden article is here.

Satire: Apology in Advance for Hypocrisy

 

Denver Mayor Mike Hancock had already appeared in this blog for giving a 'please don't travel and cut the family get together'' post just before boarding a plane for a Thanksgiving family get together..

Per a satire, he topped his previous performance on 20 December. 

He announced that he was traveling for Christmas to meet friends and family and would try to wear a disguise to avoid being seen. He 'pre apologized' to anyone who thought he was being hypocritical. 

He concluded his remarks by telling people not to travel and avoid gatherings.

I'm not 100% convinced this is satire but I think it more likely than not.

Image (which is probably photo shopped) and story here.

 

.

 Dr. Deborah Birx is the Corona Virus Response Coordinator, appointed in February 2020.

Dr. Birx is also the owner of an apparently enormous collection of scarves.

As with many people she has on numerous candidates counseled people to avoid exposure. One part of this is to curtail travel. The week before Thanksgiving she counseled to avoid travel and reduce holiday gatherings to immediate family.

As it turns out, Birx traveled to Fenwick Island in Delaware (the day after Thanksgiving) to, in her words, winterize that house. During the work she was visited by her husband, her daughter and son in law and their children (Birx's grandchildren). The entire issue of what is an 'immediate family'.  Birx has a lot of things going on in her life. Her job and her husband's job (he heads a law firm) has resulted in her living in Washington D.C. but her parents as well as her daughter and son in law and their kids live in a house in Potomac, Maryland. She and her husband own this house.

I would give her the benefit of the doubt in this case but I grant it depends on what 'immediate family' means.

The first photo of Dr. Birx and other information is here. The second photo shows some of the other scarves in her collection. 

PS  On 22 December 2020 Dr. Birx announced that she would be leaving government soon. Article and image is here.

Seattle and the Rock Thru the Window Crime Hypocrisy

Seattle City Council member Lisa Herbold has been an advocate for defunding the police for some time.

She also is the sponsor of an ordinance that would, essentially, decriminalize many misdemeanors and some felonies on the basis that the offender was poor, oppressed, mentally unstable, addicted, sexually exploited, etc.

A few days ago a rock was thrown through a window at the Herbold house.  Herbold called 911.

This is pretty obviously not hypocrisy by my definition.

First, not knowing the identity of the rock thrower, you don't know if the misdemeanor would be non prosecuted under the proposed ordinance.

Second, the ordinance is not yet in effect.

Third, even though the Seattle police have been partially defunded, calling them isn't an act that requires the police to come.

An article on this with many links is here.

The image comes from here.

The $58 T-shirt to 'Tax the Rich'

US Representative Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, a.k.a AOC, has been selling t-shirts that say, "Tax the Rich" for $58.

The first image is AOC greeting fans.

The second is AOC giving a speech (it is from the the article on the 'employee of the month'). 

The third is of AOC and the t-shirt.

Some have said this is hypocritical. 

I don't see it.  She didn't say "I am against overpricing messaging T-Shirts. She didn't say, "I am against overpaying for messaging T-Shirts.

She did, however, say that the shirts are not produced with slave labor and then say that you can get one for free if you volunteer. This is closer to hypocrisy but not quite as volunteer labor is not the same as slave labor. 

The fact that many things AOC says don't make sense doesn't mean they are hypocritical.

By the way, the Goya Food Company recently made AOC  their employee of the month because her advocacy of boycotting Goya actually increased sales. This despite AOC not being their employee.

Tweet by AOC is here.

Article here on this using the word 'hypocrisy.

Article on Goya making AOC employee of the month is here.

 

Hypocrisy from Cabo San Lucas

 Steve Adler is the Mayor of Austin Texas (image).

In early November 2020,  Mayor Adler hosted a party for his daughter's wedding. It was a relatively small party with 20 or so guests.

Then Adler got on a plane and went to Cabo San Lucas for a vacation. He owns a timeshare there (second image is of the Villa La Estancia Beach Resort and Spa; it is near Cabo).

As he was in Cabo, Adler put on his facebook page a video asking Austin residents to stay at home if you can.

Adler did not, apparently, host any parties while in Cabo. 

Nonetheless, he obviously could  have stayed home.  I won't give him extra demerit for the video since he was doing 'work' on his vacation and probably thought it was important.  He could have defended his actions by saying, "I didn't realize the danger of not staying home until I was actually in Cabo" but that would probably be seen as untrue. So I'll call it hypocrisy.

 

Story covered by Houston paper is here.

Story covered by Austin paper is here.

Zelda Gilroy and the Hypocrisy of outdoor dining at a food court

Sheila Kuehl is a supervisor in LA county representing the 3rd District.

She once played the part of the super smart 'girl next door who has a crush on the star' on Dobie Gillis.

The first image is from her acting career, the second from her political career.

 

On November 27,  Supervisor Kuehl dined al fresco (outside) at a food court.  The restaurant providing the food was Il Forno (I haven't been able to find out what she ordered).

A few hours after the meal, Kuehl voted to prohibit outdoor dining in LA county until information from public health officials allows it. She referred to outdoor dining as 'dangerous'.

I don't consider it hypocritical to dine lawfully before it becomes unlawful.

However, saying that the activity is 'dangerous' a few hours after engaging in that activity pushes the issue.  Kuehl might defend herself on this by saying that although she social distanced during the meal, others would not. However, I didn't see her employ this defense so I'll consider it hypocrisy.

 

Information on the dining after voting issue is at this site.

.

Bikini Party Hypocrisy

 

Dr Mikhail Varshavski is a celebrity doctor. 

 

In 2016 People magazine named him America's Sexiest Doctor alive. He appears on CNN sometimes.  

 

 

Like other doctors he comments on the coronavirus epidemic and tells people to be extra careful, social distance and wear masks when you can't social distance.  Recently, he was photographed at a birthday party he organized (for his 31st birthday).  No social distancing, no masks but lots of bikini wearing ladies.  In the picture with the bikini wearers, he has a light blue hat. 

 

Varshavski has not, to my knowledge, denied the party, nor apologized for it, nor defended it since the articles were published a week ago.

The information is from two articles. 

One is best news.

The other is meaww.

Thirty Minutes to Hypocrisy

 

The mayor of Denver is Michael Hancock. Mayor Hancock posted a tweet telling people, among other things, to:.

Host virtual gatherings instead of in-person dinners.

Avoid travel, if you can.

Order your holiday meal from a local eatery

 

Thirty minutes after posting the tweet, Hancock boarded a plane from Denver to Houston where he then traveled to Mississippi to have thanksgiving with his wife and daughter. The mayor's defense of this is that it was better than having the two of them travel to Denver, thus avoiding their trips.  

Of course, he could have just done a virtual gathering as in his tweet.

 

The story (and similar ones) are at this article at Reason which also embedded the tweet.

The French Laundry Hypocrisy Apology

 Governor Gavin Newsom recently went to a 50th birthday party for a friend (a lobbyist - but that has nothing to do with the hypocrisy). It was at the French Laundry Restaurant in Napa Valley. The restaurant (second

image) is pricy with meals typically costing $350 and up ( but that also has nothing to do with the hypocrisy).

The hypocrisy is that, based on reports of people who saw the event (a picture purporting to be of the event is the third image), the social distancing rules Newsom implemented were violated.  These rules are too complicated for me to understand and also the rules change with time, however, Newsom himself sort of admitted that he violated the rules.

 

He then issued an apology.

"I made a bad mistake," said Newsom. "Instead of sitting down I should have stood up and walked back and got in my car and drove to my house."

"We're all human, we all fall short sometimes," 

Newsom did not use the word 'hypocrisy' or anything similar in his apology, but in any case, it was an actual apology and it was for hypocrisy.

Report on the apology is here. 

Another report on this is here. 

update: locals report that the party was 20+ people, the wine bill alone was about $12,000

Portland 'defund the police' official calls 911

 

Jo Ann Hardesty (in the image) is a city commissioner in Portland, Oregon.

She favors defunding the police.

One day she got a Lyft ride. She asked the driver to raise the car windows. The driver said that city ordinance requires the windows to be open (due to the coronavirus). 

Commissioner Hardesty's driver went to a gas station and said she should leave and get another driver. She refused and called 911.

Hardesty does not seem to be a likeable person and being asked to leave a Lyft vehicle does not seem like a 911 event.  However, this is not actual hypocrisy because Hardesty didn't say, "I urge people to not use 911."

It is also somewhat like a person using a tax management provision that they think should be abolished. As long as it exists, people who want to use it should use it.

ps: Hardesty got another driver and reached her destination later.

News article is here.

Laughing about the Hypocrisy

 

Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf and Pennsylvania State Representative Wendy Ullman (in the image) were joking about wearing masks. 

 

A video of this with an open mike audio has been making the rounds.

 

At face value it looks like the Governor and Representative were saying we wear masks just to fool the public.  However, not having the full context (and I'm not likely to get the full context), I'm not going to call 'hypocrisy' on them.

Local Newspaper report here.

Video with open mike audio is here.

SCOTUS Nomination Hypocrisy or Not

In February 2016 after the death of Justice Scalia, then President Obama nominated Justice Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court.

There was a dispute as to whether the Senate should take up the nomination. 

In September 2020 after the death of Justice Ginsberg, then President Trump nominated Justice Barrett to the Supreme Court.

Again there was a dispute as to whether the Senate should take up the nomination. 

Among those disputing the issues, I have chosen 4 people (I was at one time only going to discuss one person but it makes more sense to discuss a quartet) whose opinions on whether the Senate should vote on confirmation in the 4th or 8th year of a President's term) were as follows:

Senator Lindsey Graham: 2016 Against; 2020 For

Senator Mitch McConnell: 2016 Against; 2020 For

Senator Charles Schumer: 2016 For 2020 Against

former Vice President Biden: 2016 For; 2020 Against (then Senator Biden was against in 1992).

Graham and Biden are in the first image.  Schumer and McConnell are in the second image.

I will discuss the Graham opinion change first since it is relatively simple and overtly stated.

Then I will discuss the McConnell opinion which is more complicated.

Regarding Graham:  2016, Senator Graham was specific and said that  he opposed a nomination in that year and would oppose a nomination in 2020 (see the collection of quotes link below).  In 2020 he had changed his mind and sent a letter (see link below) to various Democratic Senators explaining why. His reasoning was that Democratic smearing of Justice Kavanaugh in 2018 required a the change in position.  I don't follow this reasoning as it seems a non sequitur, something like, 'I won't pay you the money I owe you since you insulted me'.  However, it may make sense to Graham and I can't find any response from the addressees objecting to the reasoning.

McConnell's 2016 statements regarding the nomination to the SOTUS that year include conditions or caveats. For example, in one statement (the collection of quotes link below) he referred to an appointed by a lame duck (Obama was term limited in 2016, Trump is not term limited in 2020, although he would be a lame duck if he lost the election in November 2020). In another statement (the collection of quotes link below) McConnell notes that in 2016 the President was a Democrat and the Senate was majority Republican (as of this post the President is a Republican and the Senate is also majority Republican). I don't understand this reasoning entirely although it seems to me it has more substance than Graham's reasoning.

This brings me to the Schumer and Biden opinion change.  I have been looking for them to defend their opinion change and haven't found any. Neither have I found third party defense of their opinion change nor any reporters who even asked them about it. Now, the focus of the news is the confirmation of Justice Barrett and I suppose there will be no defense of the opinion change.

I would rate all but McConnell as hypocrites to some extent but Schumer and Biden more so since they feel no need to even acknowledge the issue. I would rank Graham as slightly less of a hypocrite than Schumer or Biden as he has a defense even if I don't think it makes sense. I'm giving McConnell a break on this since he does make a substantive case that the two situations are different. 

Finally, I acknowledge the Babylon Bee's take on this:

Nation Surprised To Learn All Politicians Are Hypocrites

The 1992 position of then Senator Biden is discussed here.

Senator Graham's Letter re 2020 situation is here.

Collection of quotes from 2016 and 2020 is here.

 Washington Post OP Ed on this calling McConnell an 'apex predator' is here.

A defense of McConnell  is here

Senator Cruz expands on the 'one party holds the Presidency, the other the Senate' reason here.

 

Babylonbee humor on this is here.

Pelosi Accused of Social Distancing Hypocrisy - I think not

 

On August 31 Speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi had her hair done at a hair salon. I take this as a shampoo, coloring and blow dry.

Normally this is not news. However, during the quarantine months, this may be news.

Apparently, Pelosi contracted with a hairdresser who had a contract with a hair salon. The hairdresser did shampooing and other tasks in the hair salon.  The local, San Francisco, ordinances do not permit this and in fact, only on September 1 did the local ordinance allow hair shampooing in and outside setting. In the image, the hair dresser is wearing a mask but Pelosi is not.

Several columnist call this hypocrisy, some even call it "Queen of Hypocrisy".

There have been many episodes of this kind, for ex  ample, Dr. Fauci in the stands at a baseball game in July not wearing a mask. 

In general there are two problems with calling it hypocrisy. Although both Fauci and Pelosi have made pronouncements like "wear facemasks, be safe, social distance", these statements are not absolute, e.g., you don't have to wear face masks if it is just you and your spouce. Anyway the first problem with calling it hypocrisy is that neither Fauci nor Pelosi has authority over local ordinances. The second is that such ordinances are, as noted, complex and have all kinds of caveats about, for example, requiring mask when social distancing is not possible. 

Pelosi claims not to know what the social distancing ordinances are for hair dressers and that is a believable claim. However, she might have made a more robust apology and noted the suffering of the nail salon and other similarly affected business owners.

In Fauci's case, the woman to his left is his wife and he doesn't need to mask protect himself from her. The person to his right is perhaps endangered by Fauci's non mask wearing but Fauci claims that he was eating and drinking at the time and you can't do this masked. This seems reasonable although given that the stands were essentially empty they could have spread out a bit more and still been able to talk to each other.  Fauci's case is weakened because when he  threw out the ceremonial first ball of the game he wore a mask while being 60 feet from the catcher but then after the pitch he did get closer so it would have been mask-required then.

Anyway, the distance of Pelosi and Fauci from authority to issue ordinances and the complexity of the ordinances do not allow a simple verdict of hypocrisy.

Post Script: Pelosi now thinks the salon should apologize to her. 

 

Post Post Script: Now Salon Owner says she is receiving death threats.

So, although not a hypocrite on this point, Pelosi seems to be a bad person.

Powerline calls it "Queen of..." here.
More complete news of this incident is here.

Article on the Fauci incident is here.

Fauci's ceremonial first pitch is here. 

 

Actress Kristy Swanson did wear a face mask for her shampoo and hair work here