by baldilocks

Last week, at the request of one Kim Kardashian West, President Trump commuted the life sentence of a non-violent drug dealer Alice Marie Johnson. Johnson had served 21 years.

Now the president wants to keep the ball rolling, as it were.

I’ve been LMAO ever since I read about this yesterday.

U.S. President Donald Trump held out an olive branch in his feud with National Football League players on Friday, asking them for recommendations as he considers pardoning several thousand people who may have been unfairly treated by the criminal justice system. (…)

On Friday, speaking to reporters before leaving for a Group of Seven summit in Canada, Trump challenged those players, the majority of whom are African-American, to advise him on employing his pardon power. He said his staff was examining some 3,000 cases of people who might deserve clemency.

“I am going to ask all of those people to recommend to me, because that’s what they’re protesting – people that they think were unfairly treated by the justice system. And I understand that,” Trump said. “They’ve seen a lot of abuse and they’ve seen a lot of unfairness.”

I’m told that this is classic Art of the Deal, which I have downloaded from the LA Public Library. It’s also giving me some Ferengi Rules of Acquisition vibes. (Deep Space Nine fans will understand.)

Whatever way this plays out, this is a win-win situation for the president. And, even if no ballplayers send him a list, other prominent people probably will – a potential win for some deserving prisoners who have behaved well while paying their debt to society or for those who have been unjustly imprisoned.

But some observers are grumbling.

“His suggestion that he might bring NFL players into the pardon process must be viewed as nothing less than a cynical, self-serving ploy to create a photo op with NFL players, many of whom have made it clear that they would not be caught standing downwind from him, much less next to him,” said Harry Edwards, a sociologist and longtime civil rights activist at the University of California at Berkeley. (…)

“This is just another attempt to divert attention and, of course, it places Donald Trump as the master of everything, just appeal to me personally and I’ll let your friends out or maybe I will pardon them,” said Jeffrey Robinson, deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union.

One would think that Longtime Civil Rights Activists and Venerable Civil Liberties Organizations would care more about injustice being rectified more than who gets the credit for the rectification.

Unless it was all about the Look At Me moral narcissism and preening for them – and for the pro ballplayers — in the first place.

Nah, couldn’t be that.

Snark aside, I do hope that some ballplayers have enough integrity and perspective to accept the president’s offer.

We need some healing in this country.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng has been blogging since 2003 as baldilocks. Her older blog is here.  She published her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game in 2012.

Hit Da Tech Guy Blog’s Tip Jar for his new not-GoDaddy host!

Or hit Juliette’s!

You know we hear a lot about the world war 2 generation, the generation of my Father & Mother as the “greatest generation”.  Although this is a designation that they would not accept (they would likely point to their parents) there is one thing about said designation that begs a question, a question so obvious that many in our universities where student pay tens of thousands of dollars annually for the education my parents could only dream of, never seem to ask.  But Stacy McCain asks it

Did your father exploit your mother as a “breeder”? Was your grandfather the agent of your grandmother’s oppression? Was your great-grandmother’s humanity denied because your great-grandfather kept her in an inferior position as a “sex object”? This is what feminist theory teaches, that human history has been nothing but a gigantic patriarchal conspiracy through which men (all men) have oppressed women (all women), and the overthrow of this collective oppression requires a revolution:

Think about it.  We live in an age were our elites consider themselves the epitome of all the proper ways person should think and believe on all subjects on like Gay Marriage our grandparents must all be sexists but bigots too and not just our particular grandfathers

I’m 45 years old and I’ve always been a news junkie. I must have been the only kid in town to watch the impeachment hearings of Nixon in awe. I don’t recall any of our liberal stalwarts during the 70’s or the 80’s and VERY few in the 90’s (and then only in the late 90’s) argue for gay marriage.

Apparently by Mr. Cohen standards all of the people who lived in those days were cowards and bigots. Jimmy Carter must have been a coward and a bigot, Reagan, Clinton, Johnson. FDR and yes even JFK and RFK must have been the worst kind of bigots. JFK junior must have been one, Sam Rayburn, Barbara Jordan, Earl Warren and Martin Luther King bigots all.

How is it that our grandparents could save the world and be such narrow-minded, church going bigots who couldn’t even tell the difference between sex and gender?

Aren’t we lucky to be living in a time full of people so much wiser than any who ever lived.

At least in their own minds anyways.

by baldilocks

A couple of weeks ago, I meant to comment on Roger L. Simon’s piece on Moral Narcissism.  In it, he expounded on a phenomenon which I’ve seen and been irritated by all my life, but had no name for.baldilocks

Moral Narcissism is an evocative term for the almost schizophrenic divide between intentions and results now common in our culture.  It doesn’t matter how anything turns out as long as your intentions are good.  And, just as importantly, the only determinant of those intentions, the only one who defines them, is you.

In other words, if you propose or do something, it only matters that you feel good or righteous about what you did or are proposing, that it makes you feel better personally.  The results are irrelevant, as are how the actual activity affects others.

Roger points to egregious examples of our society’s Invasion of the Moral Narcissists.

The Obama administration is loaded with moral narcissists, including, obviously, the president himself — Valerie Jarrett, Susan Rice, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton etc.  The media and Hollywood are also clearly stuffed to the gills with moral narcissists.

Obamacare is a perfect example of moral narcissism in action.  Never mind that the public didn’t want it. Never mind it was an atrociously planned bureaucratic mess (in fact that comes with the territory).  It was what Barack Obama wanted — for himself.

Moral narcissism creates an atmosphere of dishonesty bizarrely similar to Islamic taqqiya.  In Islam, the believer is permitted to lie to the non-believer because the believer has the greater truth.  For the moral narcissist, lies becomes truth in almost the same manner. Some like Dan Rather (a moral narcissist par excellence) could thus pronounce the Bush National Guard papers real when anyone with an IQ in triple digits could see that they were fake.  They felt real to Dan. And, crucially, that made him feel good about himself.

Roger goes further in claiming that the Bergdahl affair was another example of moral narcissism in action: that President Obama fancies himself “The Great Emacipator, Part II.” It is here that I disagree with Roger.

Barack Obama had it within his power to help six of his fellow Muslims get back to their respective homes, so that’s what he did. It was simply an act of Islamic loyalty; nothing more complicated than that.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2009; the second edition in 2012. Her new novel, Arlen’s Harem, is due in 2014. Help her fund it and help keep her blog alive!