Maybe The Great Stupid is receding at last; there are some faint signs.
Apropos of Thanksgiving, some appear to be having second thoughts about one of the silliest and most unnecessary political correctness outbreaks, the mass fervor to strip athletic teams of nicknames, logos and mascots that evoked Native American culture. If you check back, Ethics Alarms and its predecessor (2004-2009) The Ethics Scoreboard called it: the result of the political correctness excesses would be to virtually erase Native Americans, aka “Indians,” from the nation’s cultural memory. I said this more than once, and that they would come to regret it. Hollywood doesn’t make Westerns much any more, Disney has labeled “Peter Pan” (my favorite of Walt’s animated features) racist because of its portrayal of our North American predecessors, and the Land O’ Lakes girl is gone. Yet now the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources is negotiating with the NFL and the Washington “Commanders” (previously the Redskins) to bring back the banned Redskins logo. “We have good discussions with the NFL and with the Commanders,” Montana Senator Steve Daines told FOX News. “There’s good faith in negotiations going forward that’s going to allow this logo to be used again. Perhaps revenues going to a foundation that could help Native Americans in sports and so forth.” So the Washington Commanders, who adopted that boring generic name in 2020 as the Great Stupid was roaring across the land, would bring back this logo
…but without the name (which most fans still use anyway) even though it has nothing to do with “Commanders.” Makes sense to me! No, honestly, it makes no sense at all. That logo was designed by a man named Walter “Blackie” Wetzel, a councilman and chairman of the Blackfeet Nation and president of the National Congress of American Indians. The profile in the center is said to have been modeled on Blackfeet Chief John Two Guns White Calf, and Wetzel intended the art to represent Blackfeet power to “introduce that power into the minds of our nation and world.” Never mind: social justice warriors decided it was racist, even though polls showed that Native Americans mostly found team names and logos associated with their culture innocuous or even complimentary.
And here’s something really stupid: Did you know that the Washington NFL team didn’t even bother to change its team song, “Hail to the Redskins!” despite its stereotypical faux Indian melody and beat? They just changed the lyrics to “Hail to the Commanders,” which adds an extra syllable so the song no longer scans!
On other fronts…
1. Our public education system shines again: The question on “Family Feud” was “Name a state where you would be likely to see a buffalo.” Both of the team members asked that question could only come up with one answer…New York.
2. More evidence of how “baseless” Trump’s claims of voter fraud were…Documents obtained by The Federalist show that the Oregon Department of Motor Vehicles directed its employees to process the voter registrations of those with “unknown citizenship” status if they claimed to be citizens and eligible to vote. “If you don’t prove that you’re not a U.S. citizen, then you will be asked if you want to self-attest to being a citizen, and they will assist you with registering to vote,” Republican state Rep. Ed Diehl explained. Yes, they are told that falsely asserting citizenship is a crime, but the chances of being caught are nil. Under this system, the DMV sent more than 54,600 voter registrations of individuals who did not prove citizenship to Democrat Secretary of State LaVonne Griffin-Valade from June 2021 to October 2024.
3. Wedding reception ethics: “I cried at my vegan wedding — the $15K menu was completely upstaged after guests did the unthinkable” is the headline of a stunning story in the New York Post that caught my eye because I have been thinking back to my wedding day with Grace (yesterday would have been our 44th anniversary). The vegan bride planned a gourmet vegan reception meal, but some carnivores among the guests ordered pizza for everyone. Not surprisingly, the pizza was more popular than the veggies. The humiliated bride wrote at Reddit that she and her husband spent “nearly $15,000” to have a chef “to create a gourmet 5-course meal that just happened to be vegan,” and the pizza spoiled everything. “We deliberately didn’t mention the food was vegan on the invitations because we wanted people to enjoy it without prejudice,” she wrote. “Every dish was designed to be delicious and satisfying, regardless of dietary preference.” The Ethics Verdict: Everyone was unethical. One should choose a reception menu that is likely to appeal to the guests, not indulge the bride’s obsessions, but nonetheless guests are obligated to take what they are served, smile and say “thank-you.”
4. There are so, so many things one could remind angry Harris voters to question their passion about such a truly awful candidate. Over at Simple Justice, criminal defense lawyer Scott Greenfield explores one of her fiascos, Harris’ “yes” response to a question posed by the ACLU in 2019 about whether inmates should be given taxpayer-funded sex-change surgery. Typical of her feckless conduct during the entire campaign, Harris would neither repudiate her answer (for fear of alienating the extreme progressives) or confirm it (for fear of turning off sane people). He writes, “Even if she had disavowed her earlier position, it would have rung hollow in the absence of a damn good explanation for why, in 2019 as a Senator, she held this position. If her excuse was that she was pandering to the left, then that would make her a panderer. Hardly a strong reason to vote for Harris. Frankly, it’s hard to imagine any explanation for her taking that position that wouldn’t blow up in her face. While that may be a justification for offering no excuse, that would (and did) blow up in her face as well…Harris supporters argue that whatever compelled her to answer the ACLU’s question at all, and answer it in the affirmative, no longer mattered by 2024, when she no longer held those views and didn’t campaign based upon being the candidate of the woke. But her failure to deal with this problem, to confront her earlier positions, wasn’t going to disappear because her supporters so dearly wanted it to. Take deeply problematic positions and, well, they stick to you.” This would seem obvious, and yet the Harris campaign, and Harris, never seemed to figure it out….like so, so may other things.
5. Then there is this: Kamala Harris is currently raising money for a recount, even though the deadlines have passed in most of the battleground states. The Harris campaign is $20 million in debt despite raiing more than $1 billion to defeat former President Donald Trump, and the “recount” appeal is part of the effort to recoup it. Raising money for a recount without any apparent intent to ask for one is acceptable under campaign laws, according to the Federal Election Commission. That doesn’t make it ethical, just legal. The Harris Victory Fund reportedly is a joint fundraising committee authorized by the Harris campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and state Democratic parties. Yes, Kamala Harris is asking Democrats to donate money for a recount that can’t take place and that she has no intention of seeking.
(Did you know Donald Trump lies all the time?)
Ethics Alarms 
Wyoming? Anyone? Wyoming!!!
At some point we have to take the shenanigans of the 2020 election as a lesson learned and use that to safeguard future elections. I mean that on both counts. We can let the 2020 results stand, but we have to fight to make sure we have the policies in place that give us the confidence in our elections that we need.
Schadenfreude is a sin, but such an enjoyable one…
All it take is being able to string together a few cogent sentences that explain one’s current views, why they differ from the past, and why you are convinced where you stand now is right. That’s it. Surely that’s not too hard to ask? But then, I’d rather be honest and consistent than sell my soul to obtain power.
About that Schadenfreude…
(The #1 answer was “Montana.”)
Yeah, I think maybe Yellowstone might have had something to do with that. Both the popularity of the show and the behind-the-scenes drama have done a lot to put Montana front-of-mind when it comes to the generic “West.”
Regarding #4, this kind of extremism not only hurt the Democrats, but also the Republicans. Up to 3 additional senate seats could be red right now but for candidates (I’m looking at you, Kari Lake) that were more unpalatable to the state’s voters than Donald Trump.
Worse, the Democrats in most cases had either lousy incumbents or incompetent first-time candidates running. This is mostly being glossed over by the right because of Trump’s victory, but it will probably come back to haunt the Republicans in 2026 unless the Democrats complete the destruction of their brand.
But it’s amusing to see how Harris so transparently painted herself into a political corner. The Democrats have become masters of flip-flopping on positions (Gay marriage, Iraq war, illegal immigration, de-fund the police) and paying little to no political price, but it’s much harder when you passionately take virtually all the least popular positions among unaffiliated voters and then try to straddle the fence.
It was a Nancy Pelosi — “You have to vote for me to find out what I really believe!” For once, that was a bet America was unwilling to make. Barak Obama managed this very well during his first run by obscuring his radical positions with “Hope-n-change”, but Harris isn’t in the same galaxy of political skill with Obama.
“Boring generic name?” “Commanders?” How about “Washington Football Team” for boring and generic? Plus, I’ve never gotten “Commanders” as being acceptable. Isn’t the notion of superiors unacceptable in polite, progressive society? Aren’t commanders oppressing the commanded? Isn’t “Commanders” unacceptably militaristic, heteronormative and cisgendered? Isn’t “Commanders” redolent of “Master and Commander?” Come on, we can’t even say “master bedroom” anymore when talking about residential real estate. Can we talk about “master cylinders” when talking about automotive braking system parts?
And then there are the Cleveland Guardians. Speaking of things anodyne.
“Can we talk about “master cylinders” when talking about automotive braking system ?”
You darn well better because if you don’t, the guy behind the parts counter won’t know what you’re talking about.
I rather wished they’d kept “Football Team” as their nickname because it seemed like giving the finger to the NFL for makig the Redskins change their name.
Also, I got a kick out of looking at scores and seeing something like “Football Team 26, Eagle 17”.
And don’t get me started on the “Guardians” or Injured List from MLB. Or my perennial favorite whipping boy, the Mickey Mouse extra innings rule.
You’re three-for-three with those.
I was thinking the Redskins should stick their thumb in the eye of the NFL by changing their name and mascot every year or two.
-Jut
“gourmet vegan”.
This term is logically impossible.
4. It’s everywhere these days that taxpayer funded transition surgery for prisoners was a Trump administration policy in 2019. If so, why didn’t the Dems point this out? Is it true? Is it a baseless Dem talking point Anyone? Beuhler?
I saw the Reddit post about 2 weeks ago, in fact. Some of the members say it’s a repost of another similar situation and someone else claims it was generated by Chatgpt.
Whether it’s a rip-off or someone else’s post or AI-generated claptrap, the ethical notions are solid. Wedding receptions should be about entertaining guests and making them comfortable, not tricking them into eating food they wouldn’t ordinarily eat. Attending a wedding is a social agreement that you will behave yourself and not take umbrage when your personal preference isn’t honored.
I wonder what Miss Manners would say?
Ethicists replying to computer generated situations. What a world.
4. I am waiting for the surprise reveal in the story. A couple that planned a ‘surprise $15,0000 vegan meal’ for their wedding guests sound like the kind of people who will milk a situation for sympathy. I would not be surprises if there were so many guests complaining about the ‘gourmet’ vegan food that her own relatives didn’t order the pizza to keep everyone happy. Just imagine hungry children with only vegan food.
it just reminds me of a work dinner we had at a very good pizza place once. Two militant vegetarians insisted the group only eat vegetarian pizza and bullied most of my coworkers into going along. Three of us refused and ordered a meat-lover’s pizza. So, 10 people ordered 4 vegetarian pizzas and 3 people got 1 meat lover’s. What happened? When the pizzas arrived, the other 8 people insisted on ‘trying’ a piece of the meat-lover’s. Those 3 of us only got 1/2 a slice of the meat pizza because the boss insisted we couldn’t ‘hog’ it all. Most of the vegetarian pizzas went uneaten.
I think I might say New York too. Not that I think I would actually see a buffalo, but the game is based on a survey of 100 people. Its not to get the correct answer, but to get the common answer people think.
I think the result was that four out of 100 said New York.
3: …and after smiling and saying “thank-you”, go for pizza after the reception is over.
I have literally done this after a friend’s wedding where the food was THAT terribad.
–Dwayne
Yes, but I bet they didn’t spend $15,000 to make it bad on purpose and then moralize that you are a bad person if you don’t like it.
True enough. I just wanted to draw a distinction that ordering the pizza isn’t the unethical thing in and of itself; it’s embarrassing your host by ordering it and eating it AT the reception that’s the issue.
–Dwayne