An Ethics Obituary For Mitt Romney

Guest Post by Steve-O-in NJ.

[This is a comment posted by Steve-O in response to the post, “KABOOM! I Have To Take Back Every Positive Thing I Ever Said About Mitt Romney.” Properly it would be a Comment of the Day, but I decided that in both theme and length it deserved to be a free-standing guest post. I know comments are usually written with less precision than the authors might apply if they knew they were going to be highlighted—I know my comments are—so I did edit Steve’s work a bit, not substantively, and I hope he approves. JM]

I don’t know if this is even worth talking about very much, since Romney is headed toward the door and will exit as an also-ran. In his day, he amassed quite an impressive resume, certainly much more impressive than Barack Obama’s. He did a reasonably good job as governor of Massachusetts. That’s why it strikes me as odd that he did not run an effective presidential campaign, nor did he seem to grasp that campaigning on the national stage in 2012 was very different than campaigning 20, 10, or even 5 years before that.

The other side had one goal, and they stuck relentlessly to it: destroy Mitt Romney, by all means fair or foul. Positive campaigning has been pretty much dead since the days of Bush the Elder. It’s negative campaigning that moves the numbers, and Romney didn’t seem to grasp that. He tried to run a gentlemanly campaign when the other side and the media were prepared to fight as dirty as possible. This country didn’t give a damn about his resume or his plan for fixing the economy, at least not enough. They wanted things to be better, but Mitt just couldn’t make his case.

Continue reading

George Floyd Ethics Train Wreck Update: Don’t Tell Me This Is A Surprise…

Let’s begin with a side bet: What will you wager that any major mainstream media outlet will report this?

Alpha News tells us that (the bolding is mine)…

Continue reading

Comment Of The Day (3): “Perplexed Ethics Thoughts On This Video…”

Behold the third in a series of Comments of the Day on the post about the woman who started screaming as her measure response to a speaker whose opinions she didn’t want to hear, and has ordered out of her “gayborhood.” This one is by Sarah D (the others are here, and here); the inspiration was the post, “Perplexed Ethics Thoughts On This Video…”:

***

Assuming that this man is preaching peacefully on a street corner, even if he is stating things this woman disagrees with, and she came up and accosted him (perhaps not fair assumptions), her screaming like this seems to me to be res ipsa loquitor on the matter.

As for how we can engage people like that, well, I think what we need to do is treat them the way I treat my four year old when she engages in such behavior. However, I do not believe the law allows me to ask a person over the age of eighteen (I refuse to call this woman an adult) to stand in a corner, be grounded, scrub baseboards, or be spanked. If my eldest, still in single digits, acted like this, I’d never have to clean my house again.

Continue reading

Ethics Quiz: “Oh No! It’s HITLER!!!”

My ethics alarms just don’t ring very loudly on this incident. Maybe yours do.

A pregame trivia video before a Michigan State football game included a photo of Adolf Hitler on the Spartan Stadium scoreboard. (The question asked where Der Fuhrer was born.)

Though I have seen no record of whether there were complaints, the school felt it necessary to issue a profuse apology:

Really? Displaying a photograph of a historical figure who appears in hundreds of movies, is spoofed in multiple comedies and film classics, as part of a bland trivia question (It’s not like the question was about the Final Solution) requires an apology and results in a contract cancellation?

Your Ethics Alarms “Please explain this to the ethicist” Ethics Question of the Day is…

Is this a fair, competent and responsible reaction by Michigan State?

Continue reading

“When Is The Best Apology The Worst Apology?”….The Trilogy! Plus An Addition To The Apology Scale

Unbelievable! Never did I suspect, when I wrote the post about the ridiculous, racist, vicious terrorism-supporting professor Mika Tosca, that her insultingly insincere and dishonest apology would become the model for Jew-haters now crawling out of the ooze of 2023 corrupt progressivism. And yet…here we are! This morning I posted about Beverly Hills doctor Andrew Thierry, who posted on on Instagram that “Zionists are gynocidal, demonic, greedy, pedophilic retards,” and then expected us to believe that his words were misunderstood, and he was sorry for that. Now we learn that, to channel the doomed character Randy in the “Scream” films, that we aren’t merely dealing with an ethics horror sequel, but a trilogy. For Cornell University history professor Russell Rickford, who said that he was ”exhilerated” over Hamas killing babies, children and civilians in its October 6 sneak terrorist attack and taking hostages too, is now trying to apologize…because he senses that his job might be in jeopardy. So he’s lying.

Continue reading

And Speaking Of Ethics Train Wrecks…

….I have a few comments on this video from Megyn Kelly’s show, now showing on the Wuhan Virus Ethics Train Wreck:

Continue reading

Hamas-Israel War Ethics Train Wreck Update: The Left’s Mask Falls Away…Part 1: Preface

…revealing the virulent anti-Jewish bigotry beneath.

I suppose I sort of understand how so many progressives and Democrats get seduced by the “Palestinians are oppressed people” myth, and go from there to virulent anti-Semitism, or more accurately, Jew Hate. Leftism is an ideology that routinely ignores facts and history to reach convenient conclusions: the history of the Israel-Palastinian conflict does not support the narrative, so either the knee-jerks deliberately remain ignorant (contrived ignorance, which is unethical) or just pretend what has happened didn’t. The Left also likes bad analogies, and since “oppressed groups,” real or imagined, form the heart of the progressive coalition, sloppy thinking and bad history make the Jews (that is, Israel) the equivalents of those evil whites, and the Palestinians stand-ins for blacks, Native Americans, women, and LGTBQ+ victims, though Arabs are no less “white” than Israelis are. The intersectionality obsession makes one stupid, and this is a prime example.

The history is complicated, but the ethics reality is clear: the Palestinians have refused to accept that the nation of Israel is a legitimate nation and have rejected multiple opportunities to be granted a separate sovereign state if it would reject that hateful and hostile position and act accordingly. They have now relied on violence and terrorism for multiple generations to the point that its entrenched hatred can probably never be fixed, and so Israel’s refusal to trust the residents of Gaza–who elected a terrorist organization as their government—is fair, responsible and a matter of self-preservation.

The Palestinians, in short, blew it. They have oppressed themselves. Blindly supporting their position—which has automatically meant supporting violence against Jews—can only be explained by three things, individually or in various combinations: bigotry against Jews, ignorance, or cynical political posturing.

When I was growing up (and before I had researched the history), I assumed that anti-Semitism was entirely the obsession of the political Right. There were the Nazis, of course, and the American Nazi Party. Jews were primary targets of the Red Scare and McCarthyism, and associated with Communism, the Right’s boogeyman. The KKK hated Jews; so did the John Birch Society. Later, I found out how much anti-Jewish sentiment infected the administration of the Democratic Party’s most revered President, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and FDR himself. Though the reliably Democrat-voting Jewish community soft-pedaled the truth, it is now clear that many thousands of Jewish Holocaust victims would have survived if there were not so many powerful anti-Jew voices with Roosevelt’s ear. Oh, there were plenty of Republican anti-Semites in office too, make no mistake about that. But the narrative assumes that conservatives are bigots.

I have long been fascinated that no Democratic Presidential candidate has been Jewish. The only ethnic Jew to run was a Republican, Barry Goldwater, whose grandparents were both Jewish though his parents raised him as an Episcopalian. Democrats have ostentatiously nominated the first female candidate and the first black candidate, but have never nominated a Presidential candidate from the group that has been as influential on U.S. politics as either. The closest any Jew has come to the Democratic nomination was Bernie Sanders, and the party rigged the process to make sure he couldn’t prevail over Hillary Clinton. All of this could be mere happenstance, but watching so many Democrats and progressives react to a terror attack on Israel by arguing that it was justified and seeking to deny Israel its necessary response, I have to wonder. The degree of hostility towards Jews and Israel in the bastions of progressive advocacy—the educational establishment and journalism—as well as the Democratic Party itself has become blazingly apparent since the Hamas attack.

As to that revelation, good. The truth is out, the mask is off. In Part 2, I’ll review exactly how ugly what we now can see is, and some of the reactions to it.

KABOOM! I Have To Take Back Every Positive Thing I Ever Said About Mitt Romney

It was only yesterday that I wrote, in a post discussing the newly revealed court transcripts that show Shoeless Joe Jackson lying his head off under oath, “Don’t you love it when new evidence is discovered that casts new light old historical controversies, or better yet, show that the popular version of history is dead wrong?” Well, I don’t love it when such evidence reveals me to be a gullible dupe. That’s what the new evidence of Mitt Romney’s new tell-all book has done.

I would buy a book about organizing sock drawers before I’d purchase “Romney: A Reckoning,” the retiring Utah Senator’s even-all-scores tell-all book written with Mitt’s full cooperation by a friendly pro-Mitt journalist. The book’s existence shows Romney to be an Ethics Dunce: it is unprofessional and a betrayal of trust for government officials to participate in the creation of such books while their colleagues and associates are still active, as Ethics Alarms has explained repeatedly. Bill Barr recently did the same thing; I’m sure Donald Trump will, if he ever ends his public career before Hades comes out of the ground in his iron chariot pulled by fire-breathing stallions and pulls him into the Underworld forever.

Continue reading

“When Is The Best Apology The Worst Apology?”….The Sequel

The silver lining in the horrible Hamas-Israel war, as I’ve already noted, is that it seems to causing a lot of people, groups, institutions and media outlets to expose their ethics void, their anti-Jewish bigotry, and, well, the fact that they are blots on decent society. I’ll expand on this theme later today, but for now, another asshole has emulated Mika Tosca, the associate professor with the School of the Art Institute of Chicago who issued a pure Jew-Hate social media rant, and then claimed that she didn’t mean it in a mendacious apology.

The post about Tosca applies 100% to this bigot, Beverly Hills doctor Andrew Thierry, who was a apparently trying to top Mika and began by writing on on Instagram that “Zionists are gynocidal, demonic, greedy, pedophilic retards,” and followed that nice sentiment up with the two messages above. ExpertMRI fired Thierry—of course they did–and he then deleted his Hitleresque messages and had the gall to issue this gaslighting apology:

Continue reading

Ethics Dunce, Or Something: Cher

I’m sorry, that’s the Cryptkeeper, not Cher…but close enough.

Cher is really doing her utmost to prevent the re-election of Donald Trump. “I almost got an ulcer the last time,” she told The Guardian in an interview published this week, referring to his first term. “If he gets in, who knows? This time I will leave [the United States].”

What is that? Extortion? Cher is 77 and her artistic output has slowed to cameos in music videos. As one wag put it, anyone under 30 has no idea who she is, and anyone over 30 wouldn’t miss her. It’s the epitome of narcissism to presume that the threat of you leaving the country or the planet is going to persuade anyone to alter their plans, opinion or conduct.

Most all, the statement is a lie. Cher won’t leave the U.S.—almost no grandstanding celebrity ever follows through on such threats.

I admire and respect Cher. She’s a great talent with a lot of courage and character, one of the rare pop singers who really could act, and in both drama and comedy. I was recently asked which performer known by a single name was the greatest talent. I immediately said, “Cher.” (Second place: Madonna) But she should shut up and sing.