From The Signature Significance Files: “The Divine Miss M” Demonstrates When An Apology Is Too Late And Meaningless

Another thing everyone should thank Joe Manchin for is the way his decision not to capitulate to pressure on the irresponsible “Build Back Better” bill has caused so many prominent Americans to unmask themselves as the jerks, liars and frauds thet are.

Take Paul Krugman...please! The ultra-biased and partisan Times pundit is supposedly a Nobel Prize-winning economist, yet his attack on Manchin’s “betrayal“—yes, a Democrat voting his conscience rather than meekly submitting to orders is a betrayal—is an embarrassing concoction of appeals to emotion, appeals to authority, and “everybody does it.” A high school paper columnist could have written the screed. “And studies show that policies to mitigate climate change will also yield major health benefits from cleaner air over the next decade,” Krugman writes. Yes, and other studies say they might, and still other studies doubt they can.

This economist also calls the multi-trillion dollar bill “Biden’s moderate spending plan,” though the CBO estimates that enacting this legislation would result in a net increase in the deficit of at least $367 billion over the 2022-2031 period, and that’s with increased taxes. He should be ashamed of himself for abusing his own perceived authority and his readers’ trust with such garbage, but we know my now that he’s shameless.

But my favorite self-indicting jerk is Bette Midler.

Continue reading

An Ethics Alarms Challenge: How Would You Respond To This?

I am a racist

A distinguished lawyer of my acquaintance (though we have not spoken in decades) just posted what follows in a professional forum.

What is it? How did the lawyer come to believe that it should be posted? What would you say in response as a friend? A colleague? A critic?

Continue reading

Morning Ethics Warm-Up, 12/21/2021: Fake News, Fake Religion, Fake Competence…And Maybe Fake Accusations, Not That It Seems To Matter

Tonight, starting at 6 pm, EST, I’ll be facilitating a three hours CLE seminar via (yecchh) Zoom for the D.C. Bar. You can use the credits for other bars’ mandatory ethics requirements, so if you need them, I’d love to have you in the group. It’s all interactive, of course. I’ve been doing a year end legal ethics wrap-up, usually a re-boot of a seminar I present earlier in the year, for, oh, almost 20 years now. It’s not too late to register. The information is here, along with a promotional video I made a few months ago. They say video takes away 15 pounds of hair…

On the Christmas movie front: one Christmas movie that needs no ethics critique is 1947’s “The Bishop’s Wife,” an inexplicably under-seen classic film starring Cary Grant (as a very un-Clarence-like angel), Loretta Young and David Niven. It is as good as any of the Christmas classics and better than most, with a religious undertone that is missing from most of the others. In its time, “The Bishop’s Wife” was nominated for several Oscars, including Best Picture. Grant’s performance is especially deft, as he walks an extremely thin line, both in the plot and in his interpretation of the character. I was wondering last night why it hasn’t been remade, but it was: there is a 1996 musicalized version directed by Penny Marshall with Denzel Washington replacing Grant, Courtney Vance taking over for Niven, and Whitney Houston as a singing version of Loretta Young’s character. Justifiable remakes of classic films have to have a “why,” and this one’s justification was apparently that every classic with white stars has to be remade with black ones, or something. The reason I had never heard of it is that the film was generally regarded as inferior to the original, but I am going to have to track it down now and see for myself.

1. Believe all women/accusers/”survivors”… And if a career and a life is ruined unjustly, well, you gotta break some eggs to make an omelette, right? Chris Noth of “Law and Order,” “Sex in the City” and “The Good Wife” fame is now out of a job, having been fired from his supporting role on the CBS/Universal series “The Equalizer.” The reason: a Hollywood Reporter story revealed allegations of sexual assault against Noth by two as yet un-named women, one who says Noth sexually assaulted her in 2004 in Los Angeles, and another who alleges he assaulted her in his New York apartment in 2015.

Jeez, you’d think he had been nominated for the Supreme Court or something. Noth has denied the accusations, but never mind: they are enough, before any investigation, any trial, even any identification of the accusers, to get him “cancelled.”

Seems unfair, somehow….

Continue reading

Anti-Weenie Of The Year: Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV.)

no weenies

In a year scarred by so many individuals, from celebrities to academics to mere social media users, resorting to pathetic groveling in response to bullying and threats of repercussions for rightful conduct or simply stating an opinion that does not conform to Woke World cant, Sen. Joe Manchin’s refusal to be a weenie stands out like the shining city on the hill. And after several frustrating days in which I have been searching my data banks to find ten public figures I could justifiably say I admired, Senator Manchin has made the list. (I’m still three short.)

Continue reading

‘Twas The Monday Before Christmas Ethics Warm-Up, 12/20/21: “You Better Be Good For Goodness Sake!” [Corrected!]

Oops. I always thought “Santa Claus is Coming to Town” was another Gene Autry Christmas song, but it wasn’t, though Gene recorded it. It was written by J. Fred Coots and Haven Gillespie, and banjoist Harry Reser and his band performed it on Eddie Cantor’s radio show in November of 1934. That version sold  500,000 copies of sheet music and more than 30,000 records within 24 hours. It wasn’t one of Autry’s big hits, but Bing Crosby and The Andrews Sisters reached the Billboard charts with it in 1947. In 1970, Rankin-Bass did its animated “Santa Claus Is Comin’ to Town” TV special with a Fred Astaire puppetoon narrating. But it was Bruce Springsteen, of all people, who made the biggest success out of the song way back in 1975.

The creepy and unethical implication that Santa is spying on all children year long has been carried on by the disturbing “Elf on the Shelf,” which Ethics Alarms deplored here.

1. So…How long has this D.C. teacher been doing things like this? Has anyone asked for Terry McAuliffe’s reaction? At the Watkins Elementary School in the US capital, the Washington Post reported, a teacher has been suspended after making third-grade children reenact scenes from the Holocaust, including having them pretend to dig mass graves and shoot victims. She explained that this happened because “because the Jews ruined Christmas.” Some children were given specific roles. One Jewish child was told to portray  Adolf Hitler and then to pretend to commit suicide, according to the parent of the child. The instructor  told the children not to tell anyone about the activity, but someone squealed.

In an email, the school’s principal called this “a poor instructional decision.”

Ya think? Continue reading

Ethics Quote Of The Month: Ann Althouse

manchin

“Why did they hope for so much when they had a 50-50 Senate? Why did they think they’d won the support “to realize [the liberal leaders’] longtime policy goals”?

—-“Politically neutral” blogger/ former law professor Ann Althouse, commenting on the Democrats’ expressions of anger, disappointment and betrayal after Sen. Joe Manchin scuttled their multi-trillion social policies spending bill.

Why indeed. There have been a couple of Ethics Alarms posts about this general topic already, but Althouse’s reaction is particularly deft, since it functions as both a “What the hell’s the matter with these people?” legitimate query and a rhetorical question in which the answer is implicit.

That answer is that the Democrats have abandoned the basic tenets of how this republic is supposed to work as well as the principles of democracy that have served it so well. Never before in our history has the attitude of a political party been that once they have been granted power they have leave to put in place whatever policies and laws their most radical and extreme members can imagine irrespective of the clear expectations and beliefs of the American public.

The closest I can recall is the immediate prelude to the Civil War on the subject of slavery, and even then, the South revolted because it anticipated that the Republican Party would behave this way. The sweeping New Deal policies were undertaken by Democratic control of Congress and the White House with overwhelming support of a frightened public in the grip of The Great Depression. Lyndon Johnson’s extensive reforms followed his landslide victory over a conservative candidate whose views has been resoundingly rejected.

The fact that the House and the Senate are almost evenly divided reflects the lack of consensus or even a clear plurality of public opinion favoring many of the measures in the now-dead “Build Back Better” bill. Democracy exists on a foundation of respect and trust: a closely divided public compels elected officials to proceed carefully and to avoid the appearance of the government running roughshod over half the nation. If a party in power believes fervently in policies so much of the public opposes, then it must lead and persuade, not mandate and decree.

This Democratic Party’s strategy, instead, has been totalitarian in both method and spirit. The pandemic response of Democrats has been constitutionally dubious restrictions on personal liberty, mobility, and autonomy. Those who oppose their policies in this and other areas have been vilified, insulted, denigrated, bullied and threatened, and from the highest levels. Instead of legitimate debate and persuasion, the party has relied on propaganda, and a complicit news media that is expected to mislead the public while enhancing an extreme partisan message. Continue reading

Proposition: A Refusal To Answer A Direct And Relevant Question Like This Should Immediately Disqualify A Judicial Nominee As Untrustworthy

Judicial nominee ducks

Anne Traum, a law professor at the University of Nevada-Las Vegas, was nominated by President Joe Biden in November  to be the United States District Judge for the District of Nevada. Traum’s name was selected by a judicial commission in Nevada consisting of Democratic State Senators Catherine Cortez Masto and Jacky Rosen. During last week’s U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Republican Louisiana Senator John Kennedy, asked Traum, “Do you think we should forgive criminal misbehavior in the name of social justice?”

Prof. Traum replied, “Senator, thank you for that question. I recognize that all issues of crime and all responses to crime are fundamentally policy issues. So, those are important issues, they are important for our community and our nation, but I leave those policy issues to the policymakers if confirmed as a judge I would not be a policy maker.”

That does not respond to the question, and Kennedy was not satisfied. He asked again, after prefacing his second framing by saying,  “I’m not asking your opinion as a judge. I’m asking your opinion as a person, as a law professor. I’ll stipulate, with all of you, that you’re all going to be fair and unbiased.” Then he repeated,  “Do you think misbehavior and illegal acts should be forgiven in the name of social justice?” Continue reading

Sunday Ethics Mistletoe,12/19/2021: The Kiss-Off Edition

Lots of ethics stories to kiss-off, so let’s get right to it…

1. Now THAT might dissuade corporate execs from engaging in sexual harassment! Former McDonald’s chief executive Steve Easterbrook was fired by the company in 2019 for having an “inappropriate relationship” with a subordinate. As part of his settlement, he has agreed to return $105 million to McDonald’s: the company sued him for lying to investigators at the time of his dismissal. In a message to employees, Enrique Hernandez Jr., the McDonald’s Chairman of the Board, said that it was crucial to hold Easterbrook “accountable for his lies and misconduct, including the way in which he exploited his position as CEO.” It was an allegedly consensual relationship Esaterbrook engaged in with an employee in violation of company policy, but as we all know, I hope, when the boss wants a sexual relationship, it can’t be truly “consensual.” Just as a wild example, imagine, say, a President of the United States having such a relationship with a young intern….

2. More evidence of NFL culture rot…The Jacksonville Jaguars fired their head coach Urban Meyer after just 13 games, because the team was losing and Meyer’s conduct on and off the field had been unacceptable. Among other issues, the team’s former kicker Josh Lambo revealed that Meyer kicked him at an August practice. Meyer won three college national titles as the coach for Florida and Ohio State, but he also had scandals at both schools. Thirty-one of his players were arrested when he was coaching at Florida; at Ohio State, he protected a longtime assistant with a history of domestic abuse.

Why would a team hire someone with that kind of history? Such episodes suggest serious character deficits, after all. But Meyer won titles and that’s all that matters in the NFL. I wonder if he would have been fired if his team had been 11-2 instead of 2-11. No I don’t….

Continue reading

‘Values? What Values?’ The Most Admired People In The World

This depressed and discouraged me, so you might as well be discouraged too. Here’s the list of the 20 most admired men and women worldwide, according to a YouGov.com survey.

The  study surveyed “more than 42,000 people” in 38 countries and territories, and who knows how accurate it is. I would assume that the relative standings are pretty meaningless. However, I offer these observation based on the fact that we are supposed to admire people based on what they have accomplished that we regard as good, right and beneficial to humanity, and the values they exemplify in their lives. Envy is something entirely different. Thus my first observation is that the lists demonstrate that a decisive number of those surveyed do not comprehend the distinction between admiration and envy.

My second is that I see little evidence that values played a major role in the choices at all, and maybe any role.

Others: Continue reading

NYT Letters To The Editor On Abortion vs. Adoption Continue An Revealing Unethical Pattern

adoption

Perhaps no comment during the recent oral argument before SCOTUS regarding Mississippi’s Roe-defying 15 week abortion limit received more attention than Justice Amy Coney Barrett statement that a mother’s option to give a baby up for adoption at birth rendered abortion was unnecessary in most cases. Numerous abortion defenders have attempted to discredit her assertion, and, like all of the pro-abortion arguments I have seen and heard so far, fell short in logic, honesty and ethics

Today’s Sunday Times letters section exemplified the disconnect among reality, self-interest and fairness that continue to plague abortion fans, no matter how passionately they argue their position. The Times dedicated the section to rebuttals of Comey’s assertion. That the editors deemed these the cream of the crop is telling. Also telling: no letter selected by the editors supported Comey. Here are the key quotes from each:

Anne Matlack Evans, of Napa, California writes in part,

In 1954, my mother, a single mother of three young children, had no other option than to do just what Justice Barrett proposes. After losing her job because of the pregnancy, she took refuge with her mother and, several months later, gave birth to a child whom she gave up that very day….

The consequences of my mother’s pregnancy and the baby’s adoption profoundly affected my mother and us children. She was traumatized by the pregnancy and the necessity of abandoning a child — especially so after caring for us. She felt ashamed, stigmatized and less able to protect her existing children.

Ethics Alarms Comment: Why did a single mother have three children? Why did she get pregnant again? She felt ashamed and stigmatized about giving up a live infant for abortion that she couldn’t care for, but apparently would have flt no stigma or shame if she ended the nascent human being’s life before it could be born. That’s exactly the confused attitude that our culture needs to change. Her unborn child “existed” before it was born.

David Leonard of Kennett Square, Pennsylvania writes in part, Continue reading