Author: Jack Marshall

Ethics Quiz: Harvard’s International Students

/ Jack Marshall / 38 Comments

I know I’m revealing my own reaction, contrary to EA quiz protocol, but this story calls for Major Tipton:

Accompanying the hand-wringing and progressive head explosions over the Trump Administration’s various demands on Harvard University and its threatened sanctions (including blocking Harvard’s ability to enroll—and get money from—international students), was the stunning information that 6,800 international students attended Harvard College in the 2024-25 school year, which is about 27% of the student body! This, according to university enrollment data. That figure is an increase from 19.7 percent in 2010-11.

Wait: almost 30% of the slots at the U.S’s most prestigious and (supposedly) best college, with resulting diplomas that are virtual golden tickets to success, riches and happiness (or so the legend goes) don’t go to Americans?

Your Ethics Alarms Ethics Quiz of the Day this Memorial Day is…

How the Hell is this fair, civically responsible, prudent, reasonable or justifiable?

Continue reading →

The Atlantic’s Editor Tries Another Dishonest Excuse For The Axis News Media Covering Up Biden’s Dementia

/ Jack Marshall / 3 Comments

I am reaching my contempt overload limit from the excuses and spin the mainstream media enemies of the people are floating to slime out of their culpability for the Biden dementia cover-up.

Now Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief of “The Atlantic,” among the worst of the Trump-Deranged, Democratic Party totalitarianism-enabling Axis media, tried gaslighting us with this one during an interview with CNN Ethics Villain Jake Tapper on PBS’s “Washington Week”: See, allegations that the news media covered for Biden show a “misunderstanding of journalism”! Reporters need “credible sources” to report anything, see, so without “insiders” admitting on the record that the alleged President was a shambling vegetable, reporters couldn’t report it.

Let me get this straight: what everyone could see and hear since 2019 and earlier couldn’t be reported, couldn’t be verified, and couldn’t be investigated even though it was self-evident that the “insiders” were lying, making excuses about “one bad night,” Joe’s “stutter” and “cheap fakes,” and even when a mountain of circumstantial evidence like the avoidance of interviews, Cabinet meetings and unscripted appearances was in plain sight?

Sure. Whatever you say, Jeff. The news media never reports unsubstantiated “facts” without iron-clad “verification.” Like, say, “Hand up, don’t shoot!,” right?

Former Ethics Alarms idol Ken White of Popehat works for this guy. Ken was once a truth-teller, someone whose integrity I admired and tried to emulate. How sad.

Ethics Quote of the Month: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu

/ Jack Marshall / 6 Comments

‘”Free Palestine’ is just today’s version of ‘Heil Hitler’”

—-Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu this week, referring to the murder of two young Israelis by a man who screamed “Free Palestine” in Washington, D.C.

The context of that quote, from Netenyahu’s remarks last week: Continue reading →

Comment of the Day: “…Unethical Quote of the Week: David Axelrod”

/ Jack Marshall / 8 Comments

Prolific and historically literate EA commenter Steve-O-in NJ has been uncharacteristically scarce around these parts of late, but when he does weighed-in the quality of his commentary remains stellar. I’m going to have his Comment of the Day on the post “The Sequel to “Is It Ethical to Continue to Slam Former President Biden Now That It Has Been Revealed That He Has Metastatic Prostate Cancer?”— Unethical Quote of the Week: David Axelrod” kick off what bids fair to end up as “Why the Democratic Party Has Disqualified Itself From National Leadership” Monday.

Every single Democrat who runs for office should be confronted with the fact that their party spent four years defiling the Constitution and ignoring the will of their own voters. They should be asked, again and again, how do you dare associate yourself with a party that would do this? What’s your excuse? Why should any voter trust anyone who runs as a Democrat now? What does your party stand for, if it would exploit a man it chose to have the most challenging leadership responsibilities in the world knowing he wasn’t mentally able to do the job, as a means of letting backroom, unelected ideologues and partisan hacks secretly chart U.S. policy? Every Democrat office-holder or candidate should be forced to either condemn his or her party or beg for forgiveness and a second chance.

And the public’s response to their entreaties should be the same as mine: “Never!”

Here’s Steve-O…

***

There’s no way I can be other than disgusted by this manipulative tactic by the same party who regularly bashed Reagan for being a senile old man while in office and came up with at least 20 ways to attack Trump as unfit. Reagan stumbled twice in eight years, once after being shot and having major surgery, again after seven years in office plus that and according to the left he was unfit the entire time, despite no one from the White House staff and no personal or government physician coming forward to verify any allegation of senility. No one unbiased has come forward to say Trump is unfit. His biased niece doesn’t count, and neither do disgruntled former employees. Former vice president Pence, former ambassador Nikki Haley, and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo all have nothing to lose by spilling now, and every reason to do it after being publicly shut out of this administration, but none of them have.

Yet we all watched Biden deteriorate before our eyes, to the point where he could barely walk and couldn’t answer even softball questions, and the left tried to gaslight this nation by saying it was all Republican dirty tricks. This, the party of Dick Tuck, the original political dirty tricks man, whose members regularly insult the GOP as being a party made up of idiots and morons, had the audacity to accuse the same party of being masters of dirty tricks. This, the media who parlayed a single stumble, a golf swing, and a tennis serve gone wrong into a lasting image of Gerald Ford as an oaf and a klutz who couldn’t do anything right, had the audacity to bury multiple stumbles, an obvious old-guy shuffle, multiple obvious needs to be shown where to walk after initially going the wrong way, inability to answer easy questions, and a hundred other obvious signs of deterioration and THEN accuse those who pointed them out of trying to lie and deceive. If Biden hadn’t finally fallen apart in full view of the entire nation to the point where no farther denial was possible, these people would still be lying to us about Biden being sharp as a tack and having more energy than someone half his age.

Continue reading →

Incompetent Elected Official of the Week: Porto Alegre, Brazil City Councilman Ramiro Rosário

/ Jack Marshall / 4 Comments

A city in southern Brazil just enacted the country’s first legislation entirely written by AI bot ChatGPT. Normally the misadventures of a Brazilian local pol wouldn’t turn up on the EA radar, but you know—you know—that this story’s eqivilent is coming soon to our shores, if it isn’t here already

The Associated Press reports that Porto Alegre city councilman Ramiro Rosário admitted to having ChatGPT to write a proposed law aimed at preventing the city from forcing locals to pay for replacing stolen water consumption meters. He didn’t make a single change to the AI generated bill, and didn’t even tell the city council that he didn’t write it. “If I had revealed it before, the proposal certainly wouldn’t even have been taken to a vote,” Rosarío told the AP. “It would be unfair to the population to run the risk of the project not being approved simply because it was written by artificial intelligence.”

It’s unfair to let the public know that they are being governed by machines, or that their elected officials are too lazy or dumb to compose their own bills. Got it.

Porto Alegre’s council president Hamilton Sossmeier extolled the new law on social media and was embarrassed when its true author was revealed. He then called letting bots write legislation a “dangerous precedent.” Ya think? Massachusetts state senator Barry Finegold says that he has used AI to draft bills, but that he wants “work that is ChatGPT generated to be watermarked….I’m in favor of people using ChatGPT to write bills as long as it’s clear.” I think he means “clear that a bot was involved.” It’s ambiguous language like Barry’s sentence that makes it seem like ChatGPT is an improvement over human public servants.

These AI bots continue to make stuff up, cite imaginary sources, and lie…you know, just like real politicians. For his part, Rosario sees nothing wrong with letting a bot do the work he was elected to do. “All the tools we have developed as a civilization can be used for evil and good,” he told the AP. “That’s why we have to show how it can be used for good.”

Secretly employing a machine to do your work and not disclosing that fact is called “cheating.” Somebody explain to the councilman that cheating is not “good.”

Still More Evidence of the Biden Dementia Cover-up

/ Jack Marshall / 6 Comments

Jon Stewart’s podcast “The Weekly Show” podcast featured former Obama speechwriter and current “Pod Save America” co-host Jon Lovett, who used the show to admit what should cause the Democratic Party and its supporters to apologize, throw themselves on the mercy of voters and engage in a sweeping ethics reform since, you know, the party betrayed America. (It won’t, though, so it’s futile even to hope for that appropriate response.)

During a discussion of Biden’s fitness for office, Lovett spat out too many inarticulate “Unethical Quotes of the Week” to clean up, collect and enumerate, but the meaning was damning anyway. He recalled how Biden appeared in April 2024: “He was rambling, and he was hard to follow, and he repeated a story.”

“And, you know, I— I think people inside maybe weren’t being honest with themselves about what they were seeing,” he said. This is the “group think” excuse that the party’s consultants apparently worked out in a bunker somewhere and circulated around the Axis. I’m guessing it beat out the “Dr. Jill hypnotized everyone with her laser eyes” narrative. Lovett continued, “But I know if, like, from my own point of view, part of what was a challenge was because Joe Biden seemed so hellbent on staying in, right? I never wanted to be dishonest about what I felt we were seeing.” 

He didn’t want to be dishonest; he just was, poor guy. The Democrats simply cannot be allowed to escape accountability for this.

At the now infamous George Clooney fundraiser, Lovett says, it was clear to all that Biden had no business being President. “I remember feeling, ‘I wanna talk about this as a huge liability, I wanna talk about this as something Joe Biden can overcome.’ But I’m not gonna go so far as to say, ‘I think Joe Biden must drop out—He is too old to be president.’” Lovett explained. “If Joe Biden is the candidate, I want him to fucking win because I care about the country.”

He cares so much about the country that he’s willing to re-elect a disabled President who can’t do the job. That’s not “caring about the country.” That’s caring about keeping power in defiance of the Constitution and democracy.

I suppose I’m obsessing about this lately, but everybody should be obsessing about it. Democrats did this for four years, the news media let them do it, and there have to be consequences.

“The Ethicist” Faces The Ultimate Ethics Test…and Flunks

/ Jack Marshall / 5 Comments

The topic is abortion.

This is discouraging, if not unexpected. After all, “The Ethicist,” aka. NYU philosophy professor Kwame Appiah, works for the New York Times, Where Ethics Go To Die. Nonetheless, the clueless certitude of his latest column is as offensive as it is indefensible for someone in the ethics field.

An inquirer asked The Ethicist “Does My Spouse Get a Say in Whether to Carry an Unplanned Pregnancy?” That framing alone was foreshadowing for what was to come; notice that the issue is a “pregnancy” and whether it is wanted. and not the snuffing out of a nascent human life, which is where this ethical conflict becomes difficult to resolve.

This time, I’m going to do running commentary on both “Name Withheld’s” query and Prof. Appiah’s answer. First, the question:

“I’m 46, unexpectedly pregnant despite having entered perimenopause, with three children already (the youngest is 4).” COMMENT: And your age and the number of children you have affects the right of an innocent life to continue how?

“My husband calls this a “disaster,” and believes abortion is the clear choice because we didn’t want another child or plan on this pregnancy.” COMMENT: Ending a human life is only a “clear choice” for psychopaths.

Continue reading →

The Sequel to “Is It Ethical to Continue to Slam Former President Biden Now That It Has Been Revealed That He Has Metastatic Prostate Cancer?”— Unethical Quote of the Week: David Axelrod

/ Jack Marshall / 9 Comments

“I think those kinds of discussions are going to happen, but they should be more muted and set aside for now as he’s sort of struggling through this.”

—Former Obama campaign manager David Axelrod on CNN, speaking of the reporting on the cover-up of Joe Biden’s dementia for four years by Democrats and the news media

You have to say this for horrible human beings like Axelrod: at least they don’t do a very good job at hiding their cynicism, corruption, and shameless efforts to keep Americans from knowing just how little regard for democracy they have.

Many believe that the news of Biden’s rapidly advancing prostate cancer was released specifically to distract the public from the dawning realization that he was a puppet President and that persons unknown were operating the levers of power Americans thought they had elected Biden President to handle. There is substantial justification for such suspicion, as well as the belief that Democrats also withheld Biden’s cancer diagnosis in the hope that they could get him a second term so Kamala Harris would become President without having to be elected.

So Axelrod comes right out and says, “Please be distracted by the ‘Awww, poor Joe!’ strategy, and stop trying to find out who was really making decisions and policy in the White House!” Thanks, David! It’s good to remove any doubt about just how stupid your party thinks we are.

“Jake Tapper, Ethics Villain” Continues—Today’s Episode: “Jake Is Unethical, But He’s Not Stupid”

/ Jack Marshall / 3 Comments

In a just released video, conservative scholar and commentator Victor Davis Hanson adds his perspective to the Jake Tapper scandal, a sub-scandal to the Biden Dementia cover-up conspiracy of which he was a part, itself a sub-scandal of the Democratic Party’s descent into aspiring totalitarianism. From the transcript…

Continue reading →

“The Case of the Cut-Short Crucible”

/ Jack Marshall / 11 Comments

That’s what this unholy mess of a high school play ethics train wreck would be called if it were an old “Perry Mason” episode.

The run of a student production of “The Crucible” at Fannin County High School in Blue Ridge Georgia was cut from two performances to one for reasons unknown. Understandably, the students and their parents were upset. The administration explained that the reason was a licensing agreement violation, and the school was afraid of having to pay damages, or something. It said in a statement,

“After Friday night’s performance of “The Crucible,” we received several complaints as to an unauthorized change in the script of the play. Upon investigation, we learned that the performance did not reflect the original script. These alterations were not approved by the licensing company or administration. The performance contract for The Crucible does not allow modifications without prior written approval. Failing to follow the proper licensing approval process for additions led to a breach in our contract with the play’s publisher. The infraction resulted in an automatic termination of the licensing agreement. The second performance of The Crucible could not occur because we were no longer covered by a copyright agreement.”

Ah, but woke theater Fury Howard Sherman, the same guy who thinks that it’s okay for actors to boycott performances they are contractually obligated to perform because they don’t like the political views of particular audience members (like, say, the President of the United States), is muckraking again. He writes on his website that he’s sure that the show was really cancelled because “the play about witch hunts, about the persecution of people out of hysteria, despite being an acknowledge American classic widely taught in high school classrooms and performed frequently on high school stages, had provoked the same moral persecution it portrayed as unjust.” See, somebody’s mother told a student that the principle had said “that somebody in the audience didn’t like the context of the play and said that it was demonic and disgusting” so the final performance was cancelled.

Does Sherman produce any evidence that isn’t double hearsay that such a sequence occurred? Nope. Do we hear a quote or see a message from the alleged illiterate lunatic who registered such a complaint? No again. But never mind: Sherman is a progressive (to be fair, most theater types are progressives…welcome to my world) with an agenda.

Continue reading →