By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Fox News’ silence on the recent hearing involving Ashley Bondi is interpreted as an admission of its problematic nature. The article details how Department of Justice employees allegedly spent taxpayer money strategizing Bondi’s performance, including devising methods to monitor House members’ access to Epstein files and coaching her on deflecting questions. Instead of achieving her intended outcome, Bondi’s presentation was marred by an image of her back turned to Jeffrey Epstein victims seeking engagement with the DOJ. This visual is expected to become more damaging as further details of the Epstein case emerge.
Read the original article here
It seems to be a recurring theme in discussions that “we” haven’t lost our sense of shame, but rather, it’s exclusively Republicans who have. This perspective suggests a stark division in moral compasses, implying that one side of the political spectrum has shed all semblance of embarrassment and accountability, while the other remains tethered to these fundamental human emotions. It’s as if, according to this viewpoint, Republicans have undergone a collective excision of their shame centers, perhaps even surgically, a notion humorously linked to figures like Ben Carson.
The argument posits that this absence of shame isn’t a recent development but rather an inherent characteristic. Republicans, from this angle, are seen as having never truly possessed a significant sense of shame to begin with. It’s not a loss, but an enduring state of being. This viewpoint contends that the Republican Party, as a whole, has embraced a strategy where shame is simply not a factor in their pursuit of power or their political objectives.
When faced with actions that would ordinarily provoke widespread outrage or a sense of profound embarrassment, Republicans, in this interpretation, simply shrug it off. They are perceived as being entirely unfazed by criticism or by the gravity of their decisions. This lack of reaction is seen as deeply unsettling, especially when contrasted with the expectation that Democrats should, and often do, face immense pressure to account for even minor missteps.
The narrative is that Republicans have become so insulated from genuine public discourse and moral critique that they are no longer susceptible to feeling shame. It’s suggested that they have isolated themselves from the very societal norms and human connections that foster such emotions. This isolation, intentional or otherwise, allows them to operate without the internal or external checks that shame typically provides.
Furthermore, the input suggests that this perceived shamelessness is not just an individual trait but a systemic one within the Republican Party. Actions that once would have been considered unthinkable are now normalized. This normalization is viewed with alarm, as it implies a constant erosion of ethical boundaries, leaving many stunned by the speed at which previously held standards are abandoned.
The idea is presented that Republicans have, in essence, given away their shame quite easily. The shift from supporting a well-regarded Black president to embracing a figure described as a “con man” is seen as evidence of this willingness to discard principles for political expediency. This trade is perceived as a soul-selling act, driven by the desire to consolidate a specific base of support.
There’s a strong sentiment that this lack of shame makes Republicans a significant threat, both domestically and internationally. Their actions are described as creating a “concentration camp system,” imposing “random tariffs” on allies, and engaging in “mass deportations.” These are not presented as minor policy disagreements, but as fundamental affronts to democratic values and human rights.
The media’s role is also brought into question, with the accusation that it often appeases this perceived shamelessness, holding Democrats to an impossibly high standard while excusing or downplaying the actions of Republicans. This creates a paradox where calling out egregious behavior is deemed impolite, even when that behavior is described in the harshest terms.
Some argue that this situation is not one where shame has been “lost” but rather that the Republican Party has always operated without it. It’s framed as a game, where shame is not a component of their winning strategy. The pearl-clutching reaction from those who expect shame is seen as amusing to them because they operate on a fundamentally different, and to some, more ruthless, level of political engagement.
The concern is also raised about those who remain passive observers, friends of MAGA supporters, or those who simply shrug at injustices. This inaction is equated to complicity, suggesting that if one sits at a table with a Nazi and converses, one is, in effect, part of that group. This highlights a worry that a significant portion of the population may know right from wrong but choose not to care, or worse, are content as long as suffering is inflicted on others.
The notion of Republicans being “fascist domestic terrorists” is starkly put, with the assertion that they have no shame in supporting figures accused of racism and pedophilia. This is contrasted with an almost nostalgic view of a time when honor and principles guided political discourse, a time that seems to have been supplanted by a focus on “owning the libs.”
The idea that some Americans might not be part of this “we” that supposedly retains shame is explored, suggesting that a particular elite group might feel themselves exempt from the moral obligations that bind others. However, the overarching sentiment remains that the Republican Party’s actions, particularly those under a specific recent leadership, demonstrate a profound and disturbing departure from any recognizable sense of shame. The fear expressed is that this continued lack of accountability could lead to catastrophic outcomes, including civil war or broader global conflict.