I would think there is a lot to talk about ethics-wise, but I have been wrong estimating the volume of novel topics EA’s five commenters can generate before. Let’s see what happens…
Friday Open Forum!
Ethics Alarms
An ethics commentary blog on current events and issues
Yesterday while consuming my guilty pleasure of Culver’s bacon double butter burger and onion rings, I was subjected to CNN touting polls showing Democrats flipping the House and Senate. All were within the margin of error. Then, considering recent posts here, I began to wonder how much of what I was seeing was entirely fake. So I went back to my food and was happy to not ever intentionally watch any mainstream news.
BTW go Brewers!
Mentioning both Culvers and the Brewers (each fine WESconsin cultural traditions) in the same post suggests America’s Dairyland ties; ¿sí?
PWS
Actually, no. Though my middle child graduated from Lawrence U.
Clients sent their daughter to Lawrence ~20 years ago; then, it was a mere $40 large per year, which included room-n-board.
Now? Just tuition is north of $61 grand. FWIW: My last semester @U.W. in 1979 was $288.50, paid in cash by yours truly.
“The only thing that is more expensive than education is ignorance” B. Franklin
PWS
What did Ben say about “education” that makes one more ignorant?
I like Culver’s. But I find that, for some reason, the burger is less tasty as it goes on. For what it’s worth, the packaging motto, “That first bite, though…” is spot on.
Culver’s doesn’t put any seasoning on their smash burgers, try adding just a little bit of salt (doesn’t take much) to the meat before you dig in, it’s made a big difference for me. Back in the early to mid 1970’s when Hardee’s still cooked their real ground beef burgers on an open gas fired ceramic briquette grill, I added a touch of salt to their Deluxe and it rapidly became my favorite go-to burger. Culver’s deluxe isn’t up to that old Hardee’s Deluxe level but it’s a decent smash burger.
When political discussions get teeth-grindingly frustrating, it’s usually because people get defensive and hold onto their biases. To help people feel safe listening to other perspectives and reconsidering their assumptions, I find it’s most effective when I find and affirm their core concerns about the situation. They are comfortable opening their minds because they know I recognize and appreciate what matters to them.
To help more people move political arguments in a constructive direction quickly and easily, I’m running a conflict resolution workshop for identifying people’s concerns and exploring mutually agreeable approaches.
If you’d like to handle conflict calmly, confidently, and constructively, I invite you to take a brief survey about what outcomes you would want to see from such a workshop: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSf8xJxBAUgnFiFqkSEct4ot-rCB2tmMIwYbvYI-VyL1PhHhTg/viewform?usp=header
Your feedback is much appreciated, and helps ensure that the workshop delivers the results people need!
Forgive me for saying so; but, that almost sounds like a spam advertisement to get people to click a link and become part of a business.
I forgive you.
Lots of people on Ethics Alarms are frustrated that people they know are diverging wildly in what they believe is true and good and reacting very badly to suggestions that they might not have the full picture.
To more effectively help people have meaningful discussions and express their concerns about politics without being attacked for it, I’m collecting feedback on what outcomes people would want to see from those conversations. It’s a free workshop, but I want to make sure it meets people’s needs well enough to be worth their time.
I’m glad you’re doing this.
It’s hard for many of us to take on anything new, even if it sounds like a good project.
Despite the fact that you’d think many of us would be interested in participating, you may find that almost none of us actually go ahead and do so. Meanwhile all the folks who join in initially are self-recruited from other places.
Someone in NGO-land should be interested. You’ll find them.
charles w abbott
rochester NY
Thanks, Charles!
Yeah, even with the tools I provide, it still takes some effort to have a constructive conversation about politics. Before people can be comfortable investing that effort, they’ll want to see what the process looks like and be confident that it’s reliable.
Most of the early adopters will likely be people with relationships they really value that are getting tenser but haven’t broken yet, possibly because the other people value the relationships just as much.
I’ll keep at it. I know enough people who are interested in trying out the workshop; it’s always harder to find people who want to test the process in a real conversation afterwards, hence the survey.
I appreciate the vote of confidence!
Contrast the news in Virginia with commentary of David French.
Sen. L. Louise Lucas, the Democrat leader of the Virginia state Senate, was charged Thursday with racketeering, money laundering, drug trafficking offenses, bribery, and more in a public corruption case related to her family marijuana business.
https://thefederalist.com/2026/10/22/dem-leader-of-virginia-senate-arrested-on-public-corruption-charges/
Here is David French, formerly writing for National Review, in The New York Times yesterday predicting a victory for Democrats in the midterms: “Imagine that it’s January 2027 and Democrats hold both chambers of Congress. They’ve been elected in a wave of public outrage over inflation, the war in Iran, and — crucially — public corruption. In fact, a Fox News poll taken shortly before the election showed that ‘corruption in government’ was the top concern of voters, even greater than inflation.”
I think “corruption” is a talking point that’s been added by the DNC fairly recently, next to “affordability.” Isn’t it interesting that “Democracy” is no longer “on the ballot?”
Okay, let’s talk about some news this week! The Mad Left is having problems separating facts from reality.
https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/an-update-to-my-essay-of-june-2020/
So far, the Left is calling her out for opposing trans-women instead of going after the Cornell Seven.
https://notthebee.com/article/report-ex-usaid-officials-are-working-on-a-plan-to-delegitimize-the-government-and-rewrite-the-constitution-and-the-media-is-helping>
These people truly hate America, don’t they?
What do you all think?
“What do you all think?“
I think the world is being shaven by a drunken barber; H.L. Mencken puts it a tad more succinctly:
“Every Normal Man Must Be Tempted, At Times, To Spit Upon His Hands, Hoist The Black Flag, And Begin Slitting Throats.”
PWS
I got a quick one.
Harry Bronson is running to be re-elected to the State Assembly in New York State’s 138th district. I have no strong opinion about the guy. He keeps getting re-elected, maybe the next one would be worse, beats me.
One of the flyers that came in the mail (I get a lot as a registered Democrat) bragged about how the murder rate in Rochester has gone down so much since 2020 or so, thanks in part to Harry’s efforts.
But he’s been in office since 2010. If our murder rate in the county spiked to an all time high after George Floyd’s death, isn’t that partly his fault? It happened on his watch.
It must be an old trick. Bad things that happen are unanticipated, like Acts of God or Force Majeure, nothing we can do, “these things just happen.”
Improvements after the bad times should be credited to our elected representatives.
Thanks for reading!
charles w abbott
rochester NY
Reference: AI says:
Homicides in the Rochester and Monroe County area have declined significantly over recent years, dropping from a peak of 85–81 homicides in 2021 down to 36 in 2025 and even lower counts in 2026. [1, 2, 3]
Recent Yearly Homicides (Rochester / Monroe County Area)
Would you like historical data going back further (such as the 1990s or 2000s) or specific crime statistics for a particular town in Monroe County?
How about this?
Proposition 40 is aimed at levying a one-time 5% tax on the net worth of all of California’s billionaires.
If passed it is retroactive. Anyone in the affected group would owe the tax if they resided in California as of 1/1/2026. Some moved out before that date.
That’s 50 million dollars for every billion of net worth you have. Wouldn’t these people have some kind of legal recourse? I’m not a big fan of Oprah Winfrey (net worth ~3.4 billion) but I don’t agree with taxing her just because she was successful. That’s 170 million in tax for her.
It’s said to be a one time tax but that doesn’t change my mind either. You cannot tax these successful people 5% on their net worth; it’s just wrong in my opinion.
I forgot to mention that most of the billionaires on the list might not have 5% in cash on hand. Even if you are right on 1 billion net worth the tax is 50 million dollars. The CEO of NVidia has a net worth of ~184 billion resulting in a tax of 9.2 billion dollars. He would probably have to liquidate assets to fork out that much cash. I don’t know what kind of “payment scheme” they (California) envisions.
For 9.2 billion he could close his production in California and move it to Texas. Shuttering facilities and laying off every last employee is the only way to get voters to do the right thing. If voters for Prop 40 win then they should be forced to directly accept the consequences of their vote. I would be interested in how any state can make a retroactive tax burden. What if another proposition comes down the pike that retroactively imposes a tax on white privilege.
Billionaires (and some millionaires) in droves are suggesting some improbable head positions and some unnatural sex acts to the democrat politicians who have been running the Golden State into the ground for at least two decades. We are not in that exalted tax bracket, but know it is only a matter of time before they bemoan that the proposition just didn’t raise enough money to provide health care for all the illegal immigrants who have moved to California for the free stuff – and the tax will drift to lower wealth brackets. We escaped five years ago.
Scoundrels, scalawags, jackals, idiots.
I was listening to a commercial the other day and it had a narrative something like “9/11, the darkest day for America.” To be sure, it was for some sort of 9/11 related group or fund.
But it caused me to wonder — is 9/11 America’s darkest day? If you think so, what does that say about your world view and your knowledge of history?
I asked my sister — dedicated leftist but also a true America lover and patriot. She did not feel this was the case. America was not in danger of falling because of 9/11, horrific as that day might have been.
I would group 9/11 and Pearl Harbor together — both were tremendous shocks but neither were a harbinger of the imminent demise of the country.
For that, I think we can turn to possibly the Civil War but definitely the Revolutionary War. There were a couple days in the Civil War that I think might have been fatal to the country (given different leadership) — Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville.
But what really fits the bill would be a couple things. The Continental Army’s retreat across the Delaware in December 1776. It followed months of unbroken lost battles and retreats. Many enlistments were about to expire. Many folks saw the Army as on the verge of disintegration, followed by the defeat of our Revolution. But not for one man’s indomitable will and determination, all that might have come to pass.
The other would not be a day, but the winter of Valley Forge the following year. The army’s situation was again desperate and the Revolution near to foundering.
What do you folks think?
I sent this to your email but I’ll post it here too in case you are interested in writing another post about CTE
Bias-Adjusted Prevalence of Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy Among Deceased National Football League Players
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2855918?guestAccessKey=e8cda447-a6bc-48fc-b011-adf266e5ad6a
Key Points
Question: After adjusting for selection bias, what is the prevalence of chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) in deceased National Football League (NFL) players?
Findings: In this cross-sectional study of 2362 former NFL players who died between 2008 and 2023, 93.5% of players who were brain donors with neuropathologic evaluation had CTE. After adjustment for differential brain donation, the estimated prevalence of CTE neuropathology among all 2362 decedents was 74.5%.
Meaning: These findings suggest that selection bias materially inflates donor-based estimates but is unlikely to fully explain the high burden of CTE neuropathology among deceased former NFL players.
In plain English: New study estimates 75 percent of former NFL players who died from 2008 to 2023 had CTE
https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/new-study-estimates-75-percent-of-former-nfl-players-who-died-from-2008-to-2023-had-cte
Of course, a 74% risk of fatal brain injury is still unacceptable. I can’t think of any activity about which a sane person would say,”Gee, when I thought there was a 93% chance this would cripple or kill me I was hesitant, but now that I know the odds are only 74%, I’m all in!”
Exactly, Russian Roulette gives only a 16.7% chance of blowing your brains out (assuming standard revolver with one bullet) and only fools take that risk. You play football long term and you have at least a ~75% chance of brain damage.
And if you watch football on TV, you have a 100% chance of being an accessory to an industry and its allies that induces young men to take that risk of brain damage.
Shit, two links sent my comment into moderation. I momentarily forgot that caveat!
It’s up. Remember, you can email me and alert me to posts like that, and they’ll go up ASAP.