Afternoon Ethics Delights…

I should have included these in this morning’s post…

1. How desperate are Trump Deranged? This bad: a veteran lawyer, scholar and all-around good guy whom I admire and will continue to despite his extreme Trump Derangement symptoms, just wrote on Facebook: “Today’s column by Heather Delaney Reese hits the mark perfectly. The rats are increasingly deserting the Trump moral sinkhole. Not because they’re not rats, but because rats are survivors and they know a sinking ship when they see one.”

Can you guess whom he (and the columnist) is referring to? Yes, it’s Tucker Carlson. He has not been a supporter of Trump for quite a while, and has always been a dishonest, revolting hypocrite and self-serving weasel. It would be hard for me to imagine anyone who would be a worse example to cite in claiming that President Trump’s “moral sinkhole” has cost him or the Republican Party valuable support. Carlson leaving the Republican Party is approximately as much of a blow to the GOP as George Wallace leaving the Democratic Party was in 1968.

Meanwhile, this qualifies as breaking news over at the New York Times: “Images circulated by an activist group reveal bare marble where President Trump’s name once resided. The Kennedy Center previously told a federal judge it had been removed.”

2. Can someone tell me how fake caller IDs being used by robocalls and other pests are legal? I know they are unethical. The same “senior benefit” peddler has called me under false names including “Verizon,” “USMC,” “Department of Agriculture,” and “CVS,” just to name a few.

3 thoughts on “Afternoon Ethics Delights…

  1. 4. “Watched my wedding video again the other day. Damned if Michael Caine wasn’t in it!”

    — Dennis Miller

  2. Joy Reid: how many times does a name need to be repeated and heard by a populace to react as if the name has some import?

  3. Why are we not willing to recognize the harms this country has caused to those who are marginalized, disempowered, or disenfranchised? 

    We did.

    There has been a civil rights movement since the 1860’s. The 14th Amendment was ratified at a time when an amendment to enshrine racial segregation and apartheid would have been very politically popular.

    Why, instead of wielding the Equal Protection Clause as a sword against racism, do we employ it to shield against the promise of equality for all?

    It was. Again, I rem ind readers

    That program administered taxpayer-funded grants of up to $2,500 per academic year to eligible students of Black American, American Indian, Hispanic, or certain Southeast Asian backgrounds

    The 14th Amendment was used as a sword against this program.

    The answer appears to be because we have failed to fully recognize how societal and governmental practices have long continued to enforce a preference for White Americans and to burden Black Americans and those of other disadvantaged races or backgrounds.

    While this particular program did not enforce a preference for White Americans, the precedents that required the Wisconsin Supreme Court to strike down this program had struck down actual preferences for White Americans.

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.