U.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar scores a rare twin honor: He is an Ethics Dunce and an Ethics Hero in the same week.
Occupier, or just a vistor, Mr. Secretary?
First the good news, the Ethics Hero part. Salazar has given the National Park Service 30 days to fix the inaccurate, misleading and truncated quotation on the Martin Luther King Jr. National Memorial. He did this after giving the inept King Memorial Foundation plenty of time to do its job. It didn’t, and he took the initiative. Harry Johnson, president of the Foundation, told the AP he wasn’t sure what changes could be made. Well, how about using a real quote instead of a made-up one that makes Martin Luthor King sound like a preening Newt Gingrich?
Chiseled into the monument’s left flank because there wasn’t room for the actual quote is “I was a drum major for justice, peace and righteousness.” What King really said in a 1968 speech was: “If you want to say that I was a drum major, say that I was a drum major for justice. Say that I was a drum major for peace. I was a drum major for righteousness. And all of the other shallow things will not matter.” When Maya Angelou and others complained that the pompous-sounding non-quote make King sound like a boasting egotist (and one speaking from the grave!), the Foundation shrugged and erected the monument unchanged.
“This is important because Dr. King and his presence on the Mall is a forever presence for the United States of America, and we have to make sure that we get it right,” Salazar told the Washington Post. This is called “doing the right thing whether it is your job or not, because you can.” It is the essence of ethics.
Bravo, Mr. Secretary.
I wish didn’t have to call you an Ethics Dunce now.
But Ethics Dunce he is. It is Salazar who has forced the District of Columbia to live with not one but two Occupy D.C. encampments, one of them without a permit, the other with an expired permit. The occupations—they don’t qualify as protests, because they can’t agree on what specifically they are protesting—have progressively become more violent and confrontational, dirty, unhealthy, and like homeless camps than anything political. Last week a lightly-dressed toddler was left alone in a cold tent for hours, leading to the arrest of the father. (An aside: some D.C. reporters wrote that it was uncertain whether the neglectful parent was really an Occupy demonstrator or just someone living with them. Since all the “demonstrators” do now is exist, this is an irresponsible and deceptive distinction. So eager are the press-leftists to cast the squatters in a positive light that the definition of “demonstrator” has become “a well-behaved demonstrator.” If you assault a woman, get in a fight, abandon your child or poop on a police car, why, you’re just an unruly visitor. This deceit is why the Occupy movement has not had to justify its conduct or face legitimate accountability for its conduct.) In an editorial, the Washington Post reported that an inspection by the District’s director of health revealed a dangerous rat infestation as well as the potential for communicable disease, hypothermia and food-caused illnesses. Some of makeshift heaters used in the tents could also start fires.
But Salazar is still forcing the city to deal with the class-warfare grand-standing on the thoroughly discredited theory that First Amendment Rights are involved. They were once, but no longer. There is no right to camp indefinitely in public grounds simply because it is alleged to protest something. The message, such as it was, was received long, long ago. The encampments are dangerous, ugly and illegal. Why is Salazar still their champion? Good question. There is legitimate suspicion that the reason is political, that President Obama’s re-election campaign, having committed to pitting the unemployed against the employed as its strategy for November, is loath to alienate the redistribution of wealth crowd just so those working one percents can walk to the subway without being bitten by rats.
If Salazar is allowing Occupy D.C. to keep endangering and polluting the city to help his boss’s re-election (in the one jurisdiction where Obama could personally go on an arson spree and still get 90% of the vote), it is a breach of his duty. If he is doing so because he really thinks the group belongs there, he’s misguided and incompetent. Either way…Ethics Dunce.
Ethics Alarms 
Where are the leaders that want to get the unemployed back to work, fill the food shelves for the hungry in America, house the homeless who lost their homes due to pressure from banks to get the loanswithout 20% down, get medical aid to the ones that need it for quality of life, get energy assistance for expensive home heating, provide for protection from the thugs whether burglars, muderers, drug dealers, white collar crimes or illegal immigrants and protection from poison in the food, air, water and products we consume? Where are the true heroes and dunces?
Ignoring (deliberately) Michael’s pro-left diatribe, like me mention that Salazar’s belated change to the MLK monument doesn’t mean much. What distresses me the most about it is that “Mao-esque” statue of him that was sculpted my a Chinese artist who was obviously more at home depicting authoritarian figures rather than Christian pastors of humility.
Hell must be freezing over. You and I agree on how the Marines should be handled and now the statue built in china, not only that they brought people over here to work instead of having American stonme carvers finish it and place it as they agreed,
I can only imagine how Dr. King himself would react to his depiction! The only thing it lacked was the figure brandishing an AK-47 over its head.
Well at least the likeness is little better then it was originally. The first mock up they had he looked chinese.
I’m almost surprised they put him in a suit and tie instead of a Mao jacket.
Steven, I take offense to being described “pro-left”. How is my rant “pro-left”, when everyone is campaigning on these issues? I did support the “occupy” movement at first, but it isn’t bringing any results. The “Tea Party” promised jobs as well. Neither has produced anything to turn this country around.
Michael: Only someone who is pro-left would ignore the immense disparity of attitude and conduct between the Occupy Movement and the Tea Party. Nor did the Tea Party- a loose collection of constitutional patriots- “promise jobs”. We’re of the opinion that the greatest impediment to prosperity is the failure of many politicians to follow the Constitution, resulting in a huge and expensive bureaucracy, plus the inducement of an entitlement and non-productive mentality… which is typlified by the Occupiers themselves.
The Tea Party candidates DID promise jobs in the mid term election. Constitutional patriots? They don’t seem to care about the true patriots. And true patriots do NOT create rhetoric that shows the lynching of ANY American. Even if they do not support the policies or views of others. Who are the ones trying to take away the rights of people who want to freely practice their religion? People like you feel you are entitled to go around throwing language like liberal and pro-left as bad words. Then you stand behind the constitution when it is at your convenience. The patriot act, wow that saved my butt! I haven’t participated in either one and do think it’s a waste of time. However, I am a disabled vet and if my entitlements are taken, I will have to go out on the street. I have friends that are also disabled and have been throughout their life. I have one good friend that has muscualr dystrophy and is extremely intelligent, yet all he can move is his eyes. Do you count him as being lazy? My mother worked an 8-5 job 6 days a week without a promise of a pension and before she knew what a 401k was. So should she just give up her S.S. and go on the county? I can’t afford to take care of her. I know their are people out there that are lazy and don’t deserve crap. Then the republicans decide that working people should be able to give up their collective bargaining rights and then turn around and scream “class warfare”? You talk about benovolence as a bad thing. Are you a Christian? Sure don’t talk the way Christ would. Yeah, he surely would go around and make judgements like you about the government and how they shouldn’t give a damn about about the disabled, poor and unfortunate. The problem with Occupy is no cohesiveness and no concrete issues, but to me the Tea Party has done absolutely nothing either. They broke their promises to work together. They won’t even compromise. They want all entitlements to be cut and will not give an inch on taxes. I am barely living a quality life and it is nowhere near $250,000. If I could do more, I would. But I will not give up on my country regardless of the few that soak the system. I feel that everyone deserves a shot. I don’t even think you read my rant. I don’t believe in a free ticket but who are you to judge who deserves what? Oh that’s right you are a Christian and a vet. You deserve more than anyone else. You sound like an elitist jerk. Wow, pro-left diatribe! You are so clueless. I’d hate to have to trust your butt in battle, because you would probably shoot up half the team because they didn’t qualify as an American in your book. WOW!
If you have facts/objective evidence of why Salazar did or didn’t act in a certain way, then by all means state it. ” Legitimate suspicion” is in the eye of the beholder and doesn’t qualify when we are talking ethics.
Not true. Legitimate suspicion is “the appearance of impropriety” exemplified, a core government service no-no. Absent a reasonable explanation why the Administrations representative is stopping DC officials from taking the same actions of behalf of public safety and health that other cities have, I have to presume that it is being done in the Administration’s perceived interest rather than the public’s. And no, a bogus First Amendment right where there is none is not a reasonable explanation.
If you say it is “your suspicion”, which of course it is, I have no problem with it. However, “legitimate” in the way you are using it can be called upon to sound more objective than it is. It is your personal viewpoint, which may or may not be correct.
Reasonable then. It is a reasonable suspicion.
So what’s the over/under on the MLK quote getting changed to:
“I was a drum major for xxxxxxxx xxxxx xxx righteousness.”
…which would technically be an accurate quote?
–Dwayne