Support.
Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!
Contact
Top Headlines
NeverTrump Nebraska Congressman Don Bacon throws in the towel, won't seek reelection in 2026
I wonder if he's the one who complained about the BBB imposing work requirements on able-bodied adults without children for Medicaid.
Ever Wonder How The Woke Left Can Be So Obviously Hypocritical And Automatically Reject All Opposing Facts? Below are four short 5 minute videos of author Melanie Phillips explaining why. The Disturbing Logic Of The Left.*** The Psychology Behind Why the WOKE Left Can't Win Arguments.*** The Bizarre Union of Woke and Jihad.*** Truth is a Right Wing Concept. [dri]
Wow, Katie Perry is having a rough couple of years: like her career, her engagement to Orlando Bloom is now over
The Trump Curse strikes again. She went from an apolitical ditz to a Hillary Clinton Crusader in 2016 and her career bottomed out like Hillary Clinton's blood sugar level after a weekend of vodka and self-pity. The Trump Curse even follows you into space, yo. Or at least into the lower upper atmosphere.
Forgotten 80s Mystery Click, I Can't Believe It's Not Night Ranger Edition
If you would just be sensible
You'd find me indispensable
I pray deep down to destiny
That it places you with me
Whoa, wanting you here in the sheets
Wandering around incomplete
Waiting so long

I'm pretty sure I've linked this before but it's a banger.
Republican running for Mitch McConnell's seat literally trashes him in new ad
Kari Lake, just when I think you couldn't get any dumber, you pull a stunt like this, and totally redeem yourself!!!
I think the Democrat is arguing that the political appointees should exercise no control over their rabidly communist VOA employees. This is what they're always arguing -- they stock the bureaucracy with literal communists and then claim that the voters should have no control over these unfirable radicals. Lake offers a for-instance that will appeal to this Democrat of allegedly-suspect bedroom guests.
LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Lalo Schifrin, the composer behind the iconic 'Mission: Impossible' theme and many more film and TV scores, dies at 93.

This post will self-destruct in five seconds.
Chuck Schumer hospitalized after experiencing "lightheadness" while attempting to diagram a Kamala Harris sentence
Wait, it says he was supposedly working out at the gym. Sure, whatev's. Maybe he had a fight with Harry Reid's exercise bands.
CJN podcast 1400 copy.jpg
Podcast: The surgical strike on Iran, NYC Democrats choose a socialist Jew-hater for mayor, Trump bitch-slaps NATO, the California clown show continues, and more!
Recent Entries
Tuesday Overnight Open Thread - July 1, 2025 [scampydog]
Big Cats Cafe
Quick Hits
The Fake Republicans in the Senate Screwed Us and the Fake Republicans in the House Are Complaining They Didn't Screw Us Enough
Kristi Noem: We Are Investigating CNN for Promoting an App That Allows Radicals and Criminals to Track Indivdual ICE Agents' Movements
Poll: Thomas Massie Would Lose to a Republican Challenger?
Trump Tours "Alligator Alcatraz;" Agrees to Let DeSantis Deputize National Guardsmen as Immigration Judges to Speed Up Deportations
Jaguar's Sales Drop by 97.5% After Bizarre Gender-Blender Rebranding Campaign
Big Unbeautiful Bill Passes Senate with Vance's Tie-Breaking Vote
The Morning Rant: Minimalist Edition
Recent Comments
Piper: " 190 Huskies are all drama and yodeling, and once ..." [view]

Captain Fantastic : "RIP Jimmah Swagert. It was Jimmah that taught me e ..." [view]

mindful webworker - artificially ignorant: "I can't remember where I find things online. Did s ..." [view]

gKWVE: "so there's an Honest Trailer for Spaceballs ..." [view]

tankdemon : "203 Is a spaceship launch a “shot”? P ..." [view]

NemoMeImpuneLacessit[/i][/b][/u][/s]: "Is a spaceship launch a “shot”? ..." [view]

Iris: "199 I could generally tell what was AI and what wa ..." [view]

Soothsayer: " They remade The Running Man? Arnold ruined so ..." [view]

RickZ: "[i]I thought they went teets up in the 80's. Post ..." [view]

NemoMeImpuneLacessit[/i][/b][/u][/s]: "I could generally tell what was AI and what was re ..." [view]

Ciampino - No brrrrrs: " Did you see the rocket? BEEERRRRRRIES all the ..." [view]

Itinerant Alley Butcher: "Shot == shit Thanks prudish autocucumber ..." [view]

Soothsayer: " Fuddruckers still exists! Ir does?? I thou ..." [view]

Eromero: "AI girl is just on the holodeck fooling around. ..." [view]

ChristyBlinkyTheGreat: "Ace o' Spades brain damage: I was taking a show ..." [view]

Search


Bloggers in Arms

RI Red's Blog!
Behind The Black
CutJibNewsletter
The Pipeline
Second City Cop
Talk Of The Town with Steve Noxon
Belmont Club
Chicago Boyz
Cold Fury
Da Goddess
Daily Pundit
Dawn Eden
Day by Day (Cartoon)
EduWonk
Enter Stage Right
The Epoch Times
Grim's Hall
Victor Davis Hanson
Hugh Hewitt
IMAO
Instapundit
JihadWatch
Kausfiles
Lileks/The Bleat
Memeorandum (Metablog)
Outside the Beltway
Patterico's Pontifications
The People's Cube
Powerline
RedState
Reliapundit
Viking Pundit
WizBang
Faces From Ace's
The Rogues' Gallery.
Archives
Syndicate this site (XML)

Powered by
Movable Type 2.64

« Oh, That Liberal Ombudsman | Main | Italy Arrests Madrid Bombing Mastermind »
June 08, 2004

On Double Standards

It seems to me that double standards evolve in the following manner:

1) In the beginning, the double-standard exists, but those who practice it are not really aware of it. People are always much more sensitive to unfairness towards they themselves than unfairness to other people. Those who practice double-standards initially are unconscious of them, as the unfairness falls to groups they are unsympathetic to.

2) After some time, the existence of the double-standard is brought to their attention. They ignore the charge, chielfly because the beneficiaries of the double-standard are groups or people they're sympathetic to, and those injured by the double-standard are people or groups they're hostile to. In their minds, no harm, no foul.

3) At some point, the existence of the double-standard is well-documented enough, and complained about loudly enough, that they can no longer simply ignore it. At this point, the practitioners of the double-standards simply begin lying. They claim there is no double-standard at all.

This, of course, is where most of the liberal media is right now, and in fact has been for 20 or 30 years.

4) Finally, the existence of the double-standard can no longer be denied with a straight face. At this point, rather than strive for fairness and the abolition of the double-standard, the proponents of the double-standard simply begin inventing reasons as to why the double-standard is necessary and justified and right.

That's the classic trajectory we've seen in the academy. Academics spend long hours explaining why it's necessary to treat one group differently than another. Whether it's "white skin priviledge" or the "residual psychological effects of historical oppression" or the claim that "girls aren't as aggressive as boys in raising their hands in class," there always comes a point at which the defenders of the double-standard half-drop (but only half drop) their claim that there is no bias and simply begin explaining, with patient bemusement, why that bias is necessary and good.

The media is now beginning to enter stage four. Paul Krugman has been claiming for years that treating Republicans "fairly" is not really fair at all, since all we do is lie and cheat and con and kill. You wouldn't try to treat Hitler fairly, he notes.

The Post's ombudsman now finds Paul Krugman's theories about the need and justification for the pro-liberal, anti-conservative double-standard very "interesting" as well.

Pretty soon this will become conventional liberal wisdom, and the liberal media will begin arguing along two tracks: No, there is no bias and Whatever "bias" there is is perfectly justified, because conservatives are liars and, in the words of the Simpsons, "We Want What's Worst for Everyone."

Now, that's sort of bad, because people will commit crimes more frequently when they believe they have a philosophical justification for doing so. People may do bad things, but they do bad things less frequently, and less blatantly, when they believe these acts are indeed "bad things."

Once they're given a philosophical justification for engaging in bad acts, Katie bar the door.

And the left always gets around, eventually, to providing a faux-intellectual framework for justifying its bad acts.

But, in another way, all this is good, because

1) it's more honest

2) we can finally have a debate over bias when they begin admitting it actually exists (even if they do go on to justify it) and

3) the admission of bias will allow news-consumers to actually evaluate whether or not our unbiased media can be trusted.

So, cheers to Paul Krugman and the Post's ombudsmen. At least they have the honesty to admit what 90% of the media believes and acts upon.

The media knows it's biased. The media, however, believes that its bias is good for society. Let us get past these childish denials and have a discussion about what the media actually believes.

Something that may "interest" the Post's ombudsmen: CBS News recently reported that "Kerry says" we've lost 2.2 million jobs, whereas "Bush says" we've now only lost about 1.1 million.

CBS reported both claims uncritically. It was a He Said, He Said, situation, which CBSNews could not adjudicate.

Trouble is, of course, we have the numbers. They are not subject to debate. Kerry is wrong. Bush is right.

I'm sure the Post's ombudsman finds it equally "interesting" that, in a debate in which Kerry was clearly wrong and Bush clearly right, the reporter took a perfectly neutral stance between the competing claims.

Apparently liberal reporters are required to aggressively debunk "misleading" conservative claims -- because reporting such claims strictly neutrally might be "fair" to the claim but would be "unfair" to the truth -- but are not similarly obligated to debunk flat-out dishonest claims from John Kerry.


posted by Ace at 02:59 PM