And Now, A Christmas Eve IIPTDXTTNMIAFB Video!

[You watch this at your own risk, and if you go blind or your brain melts, you were warned.]

I was wishing and hoping that YouTube would post this, because yesterday it was only available on platforms that WordPress won’t embed. And behold! There it was this morning. Yet another Christmas miracle!

I blush to admit that I have a lot of experience with this kind of earnest, faux-cheery performing: I’ve performed, choreographed and directed such junk myself. Never in the past 30 years, and never with performers in their thirties, however. Kids were best: they can get away with it. This “Up With People” -style horror was annoying when it was in vogue, but now it can only be justified as camp. To see middle-aged adults like this is excruciating, or should be. (I couldn’t last the full 2+ minutes. I just couldn’t)

I also note:

Continue reading

Needed: A Civil Substitute For “Oh, Bullshit!” To Describe Kamala Harris’s Excuses

I know Ethics Alarms has covered this before ( like yesterday’s compendium, #4), but it’s “Popeye” territory: there’s only so much I can stand. Or “stands.”

Several sources are quoting (Ugh! Yecchh! Ptui!) Hillary Clinton’s assertion that poor Kamala Harris is being unfairly criticized because of her gender. You know, like Hillary was. ( I actually typed that without breaking up laughing. It’s a Christmas miracle!) The losing Presidential candidate responsible for the most incompetent campaign in U.S. political history said,

“There is a double standard; it’s sadly alive and well,” Clinton told the newspaper. “A lot of what is being used to judge her, just like it was to judge me, or the women who ran in 2020, or everybody else, is really colored by that.”

Harris, meanwhile, has been reportedly whining to staff and confidantes about how none of the previous 48 Vice-Presidents were covered as negatively as she, nor so insulted by critics. So now we know that on top of her other throbbing deficiencies, Kamala Harris don’t know much about history, to quote Sam Cooke. Continue reading

The Kim Potter Verdict

Kim_Potter

After four days of deliberations, a Minnesota jury found former police officer Kim Potter guilty of first-degree manslaughter and second-degree manslaughter in connection with the April 11th shooting death of Daunte Wright.

Bodycam footage of his arrest showed Wright, who was being detained after a traffic stop due to an outstanding warrant, struggling with police. He managed to evade them got back into the car. He appeared to be attempting flee in his vehicle. Potter could be heard saying, “I’ll tase you,” followed a few seconds later by, “Taser, taser, taser!” Potter then shot Wright with her gun. She immediately said, “Oh, shit, I just shot him.” Officers attempted CPR, but Wright was pronounced dead at the scene.

Neither the prosecution nor the defense seemed to question that Potter had made a terrible mistake in the heat of the confrontation. Based on the Minnesota first degree manslaughter law, I see no way Potter could have been convicted of that crime:

Continue reading

Ethics Resuscitation,12/23/21: Lift, Spirits, LIFT!

Boy, has today ever been a rotten prelude to Christmas! There’s nothing like feeling like Bob Cratchit and Scrooge at the same time….Hit it, Judy!

Yeah, easy for YOU to say…

1. Admittedly, it’s hard to be unusually unethical on a phony show like “Paranormal Experiences,” but I was fascinated to see how actual news footage of a dog rescue would be tied into the show’s theme. A dog was viewed by a crowd at New York’s East River as it desperately dog-paddled for land, then panicked and began swimming in circles. A police officer dived into the freezing (and filthy) water and grabbed the dog by the collar, getting bitten in the face and hand in the process, to tow the canine to safety as the crowd cheered him on. How was this “paranormal”?

As one onlooker explained it, the officer was a water rescue specialist, and the crowd had gathered for a ceremony honoring him. It couldn’t be a mere coincidence that a drowning dog just happened to turn up during that ceremony for that officer, could it? No, something supernatural was afoot! Such a coincidence can’t happen by itself!

Yes, it can, and does, every day, many, many times, you moron. A TV episode like this makes the public stupid and superstitious, which makes them easy to manipulate and con. Given enough time and random events, anything that can happen will happen, and the proclivity to see portents and miracles in standard chaos-driven events undermines life competence.

Where do you think the term “lucky dog” came from?

Continue reading

Hillary’s Unethical Lawyer Has An Unethical Plan To Keep The House Democratic

Machiavelli

It is increasingly looking like Marc Elias, the chief lawyer architect of the Hillary Clinton campaign’s efforts to manufacture baseless suspicion that Donald Trump and his campaign “colluded” with the Russians to tilt the 2016 election, may face legal and ethical consequences for his role. We shall see: the investigation’s results are still being analyzed. Meanwhile, Elias is unrepentant and still devising ways to assist his favorite political party ( he has been often called the most prominent Democratic attorney in America ) with strategies for which “dubious” is a compliment.

Behold this tweet by Elias from this week:

Elias tweet

Continue reading

‘Making An Example’ Ethics: The Condemnation Of Eddie Slovik

Eddie Slovik

Last year, when I noted this story in the December 23 warm-up, I was asked if there would be more on the topic. Here is more. It deserves it.

During World War II, U.S. Army Pvt. Eddie Slovik was tried for desertion. On this date in 1944 he was found guilty in his court martial and condemned to death by firing squad. It was the first such sentence against a U.S. Army soldier since the Civil War, and Slovik was the only soldier executed for desertion in World War II. In the intervening years between then and now, his death has become a point of ethical controversy, never resolved, and generally debated before the public from an emotional rather than an ethical, legal or even a military perspective.

I was first told the story of Eddie Slovik by my father, a decorated army veteran and officer during the war. A fervent admirer of General Eisenhower, he still disagreed with Ike’s much criticized decision to allow Slovik’s execution by firing squad to go forward. Dad was not supportive of the command principle of using a particularly blatant example of a crime to send a message to others considering similar conduct, and having had several Eddie Sloviks to contend with under his command, he did not like the resolution of the Slovik dilemma.

I argued the point with him many times over the years. “The question isn’t whether it was fair for Slovik to have been shot,” I told him. “It was. The question is whether many more deserters should have been shot as well.”

Private Eddie Slovik was a draftee, and not a good bet to be a good soldier. He had been classified 4-F because he had spend time in prison for a felony (grand theft auto), but was deemed draftable as the Allied war effort required quantity even more than quality as the conflict dragged on. He was trained to be a rifleman, though Slovik claimed that he hated guns.

In August of 1944, the Army shipped Slovik to France to fight with the 28th Infantry Division, which had suffered massive casualties. When he experienced being under heavy fire for the first time, Slovik concluded that he would not make it in combat. Though the current trend is to say that he and a friend “got lost,” it seems more likely that they were hiding before they turned themselves in to the Canadian military police. The Canadians returned the two to the Americans after about a month and a half.

Slovik asked the company commander if “getting lost” again would be considered desertion. Despite being warned that it would be, he went AWOL, then the next day turned himself in at a nearby field kitchen. He handed the cook this statement:

Continue reading

It’s An IIPTDXTTNMIAFB Video!

I would have posted this Tik-Tok video earlier, but WordPress will only embed YouTube, and it took a while for that platform to keep down its gorge and include this offal. It has IIPTDXTTNMIAFB (“Imagine if President Trump did X that the news media is accepting from Biden.”) written all over it.

This desperate pro-vaccination PSA seems to have cornered the adjective “cringeworthy,” and teens are using that description as much as adults. The “Joe Byron” reference has to do with another viral video by the YouTube channel SideTalk, which features a bunch of weirdos from Coney Island referring to the President by that name.

Oh. How…clever. Apparently the target audience for a video featuring the Jonas Brothers acting like 10-year-olds are insulted that such an appeal would be regarded as persuasive, and recognize condescending pandering when they see it. The non-target audience is wondering what the President of the United States is doing lowering the stature his office by appearing with these clowns.

Now, just imagine the media reaction if Trump had been the guy with the camera instead of “Byron.” Look who this reality show phony gets to deal with a life and death catastrophe like a pandemic! Norms! Norms! Well, some norms really shouldn’t ever be destroyed…like the norm that Presidents don’t toss away their dignity on the likes of the Jonas Brothers.

___________________

Source: Rolling Stone

Rationalizer Of The Year: Drunk Driver Perla Aguilar

(I was hoping to get Sidney Wang out one more time before New Years…)

Perla Aguilar, 27, was arrested for DUI in Oklahoma, and had an excuse she apparently thought would clear everything up. Slurring her words as she spoke, Perla explained to the arresting officers that she should be in the clear because she “does this all the time.”

Continue reading

Late Morning Ethics Warm-Up, 12/22/2021 (But It’s Morning In Hawaii!)

An exhausting day yesterday that extended several hours into the evening thanks to having a legal ethics seminar to run, so I am late to the office as well as feeling less than smurfy. I’m sorry. One more example of how the lockdown as well as other questionable pandemic responses will have unanticipated and negative impacts going forward: my Zoom versions of what were designed as live, interactive, dynamic in-person seminars tend to devolve into lectures, as I can neither see, interact with or prod participants into Socratic dialogues. I have to talk and improvise the whole three hours, and the results are decidedly inferior to what I can achieve in person. Lawyers are going to have less-effective ethics alarms in the days to come…

1. Ethics Quote of the Day: Times critic Lindsay Zoladz, in her essay about the current rush to recast past events, art, culture and personalities according to current sensibilities:

The allure of presentism is causing people to romanticize contemporary perspectives at the expense of an excessively vilified past…The past was imperfect, yes, but so is the present. Inevitably, the future will be too. The lesson to be taken from all these reconsiderations is not necessarily how much wiser we are now, but how difficult it is to see the biases of the present moment. If anything, these looks back should be reminders to stay vigilant against presentism, conventional wisdom and the numbing orthodoxy of groupthink. 

Bingo.

2. Now who’s ready to do the same to anti-free speech, thought-controlling colleges and universities? Jeff T. Green, an advertising-technology billionaire, formally resigned his membership in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and publicly rebuked the faith over social issues and LGBTQ rights.

“I believe the Mormon church has hindered global progress in women’s rights, civil rights and racial equality, and LGBTQ+ rights,” he wrote in a resignation letter to Mormon church President Russell Nelson. Eleven family members and a friend formally resigned along with him. Now Green’s  estimated $5 billion assets will be donated elsewhere, starting with a $600,000 donation to the LGBTQ-rights group Equality Utah.

Wealthy donors and philanthropists too often continue to fund other institutions that pursue values and objectives that the donors do not support, being satisfied as long as their names remain in marble somewhere on campus. This is not only a foolish use of charitable funds, it’s an unethical one. Continue reading

Comment Of The Day: “An Ethics Alarms Challenge: How Would You Respond To This?” [Corrected]

Dear Friend

As I suspected it might, the Ethics Alarms post challenging readers to propose the best and most ethical way to respond to a lawyer’ self-flagellating declaration that he was a racist and only recently realized it sparked several Comment of the Day-worthy responses. The first is from mermaidmary99, whose comments are almost always spammed by WordPress, including this one. I have no clue why. Here is mermaidmary99’s Comment of the Day on the post, “An Ethics Alarms Challenge: How Would You Respond To This?.”

***

Dear Friend,

Wow, thank you for sharing such a heartfelt and personal journey.

In reading your words, I can see you are deeply moved. I’m thankful for your awareness of your experiences.

What I’m not understanding is how what you shared makes you a racist. In fact, that you see there have been injustices to me would show the opposite.

Can you clarify how you specifically are racist? Do you believe Mexicans are lazy? Do you hold that native Americans were savages? That black people are lesser because of skin color? Have you deliberately treated others badly and wished them harm because of their race?

I’m not seeing that in your writing, but if so, then yes, you have acted with prejudice in the past and that’s wrong and good to become aware of.

Continue reading