Jim Gaffigan can be a funny stand-up comic, but whoever it was at CBS who invited him to write a political op-ed piece should be fired. Here it is, with a few comments from me…
“How are you holding up? Are you over it? I’m over it. I’m fine. At least, at times I think that. It’s obviously not what I wanted but that’s life. I’m not going to lie. It been an adjustment, but the world continues to spin.”
It’s an election, you fool. Just because you hang out with people who are Trump Deranged and think anything short of woke insanity, mandatory political correctness and free “gender-affirming care” for illegal immigrants in prison is fascism doesn’t mean this or any election is something you have to “hold up” after. This kind of talk spreads panic, paranoia, division and craziness. Shut up.
“And I’m an adult. I have children that are counting on me. I mean, they don’t listen to me, but I can’t just curl up in a ball and mope.”
Which is more ethical: for President Biden to pardon his black sheep son Hunter, or for him to let Hinter be sentenced to prison?
By that wording you can tell that I regard this not as an ethical dilemma but rather an ethics conflict. In the latter variety of ethics problem, two separate ethical principles dictate diametrically opposed solutions. This same ethics conflict has been explored in too many novels, movies and TV episodes to list. “Blue Bloods,” Tom Selleck’s ethics-obsessed cop show revisits the problem regularly: does loyalty to family always trump professional duties and obligations, and if not, when?
The Presidential pardon power is absolute, and many have opined, “Why wouldn’t Biden pardon Hunter?” Other Presidents have pardoned friends, benefactors (Gerald Ford pardoned the man who made him President), donors and supporters. Ann Althouse weighed in with this cynical rant…
I missed this pre-Great Stupid story in 2019, when it was a harbinger of stupid things to come, and so missed it again this year, when it was back in the news a few days ago. It wasn’t too long ago that Fred and Pennagain reliably alerted me to ethics stories around the web that I otherwise might have missed. A few of you do send me story ideas regularly, but something like this shouldn’t slip through the cracks.
“This” is this (Source of that movie quote?): Absurdist artist Maurizio Cattelan taped a banana to a wall at an art show in 2019 and called it “Comedian. He claimed that it was intended to force critics to consider how modern “art” is defined, but it just as easily have been a publicity stunt or a con. My wige considered Jackson Pollock paintings no more “art” than bananas taped to a wall. Performance artist David Datuna ripped the banana off the wall and ate it, so Cattalan just taped another banana to another wall. The New York Post recreated “Comedian” for just $5.75, but, see, because the Post isn’t an “artist,” that didn’t count.
Since yesterday’s trivia quiz was so well received, I’m also going to begin today with more non-ethics light-heartedness, sort of. [The answer to that trivia question is Carl Switzer, better known by his “Our Gang” character’s name, “Alfalfa.” It was a trick question in that I deliberately asked about what actor “appeared” in two of the Ethics Alarms Christmas classics that have a viewers guide published annually here (the third is “Miracle on 34th Street). Switzer, his career as an adult actor sinking fast, is the high school student who makes George Bailey and Mary fall into a gym swimming pool while they are doing the Charleston in “IAWL” It’s also his face in the photo (above) of the Haines Sister’s brother, “the Dog-Faced Boy” who served with Bing and Danny in the army. Switzer wasn’t credited for that “appearance.” A couple of commenters alluded to the answer by saying that they were sure “our gang” at Ethics Alarms could come up with the answer, and that there was “a grain of truth in that.” Grain, alfalafa…get it?
Since last week, in succession, “The Ethicist” who hangs out at the New York Times Magazine has chosen to answer “My Mom Voted for Trump. Can We Let It Go?,” then “Am I a Hypocrite for Calling Donald Trump a Liar?” (which was too stupid for Ethics Alarms to even make fun of) and now comes the brain-melting “Shouldn’t Trump Voters Be Viewed as Traitors?”
“Name Withheld” writes, “From my perspective, the attack on the Capitol spurred on by Donald Trump on Jan. 6, 2021, the efforts to nullify the results of the 2020 election with false electors and unfounded court cases and the persistent effort to discredit those election results without evidence amounted to an attempt to overthrow a pillar of our democracy. More to the point, 18 U.S. Code Chapter 115 includes crimes against the nation described as treason, misprision of treason, rebellion or insurrection, seditious conspiracy and advocating the overthrow of government. I hold anyone voting for Trump at least morally guilty for the consequences of Jan. 6 and everything that follows the recent election. Would you agree that people who vote for Trump in light of these circumstances are themselves guilty of treasonous acts?”
This is the day before my birthday, once a relatively welcome event, now taboo, as December 1 was the day I found my wonderful father dead in his favorite chair after he died in his sleep at the age of 89. I can’t shake the sense that my father’s exit from the world was of more import than my entering it, though I know he would disagree. My sister has convinced me to let her tale me to see “Wicked” tomorrow evening, which will be the first movie I have seen in a theater since 2019. I consider this excursion ethics research and an obligation of cultural literacy. Is the film “woke”? Is it another Hollywood propaganda effort but one that is subtle enough not to alienate audiences, like Disney’s recent output? Are conservative critics just seeing the movie through jaundiced eyes? Are there any songs in the show that are genuinely memorable, unlike the songs in virtually every other Broadway hit musical since “Les Miz”?
As was pointed out by commenter John Paul here, the film version of “Wicked” has an unethical title, as it is in fact only the first act of the musical despite clocking in at over 150 minutes, almost as long as the stage show. There will be a “Wicked” Part 2 for sure: if the film had tanked, it would have been quietly cancelled, like the the planned second installment of “The Golden Compass” and the promised sequel to “Silverado.”
Now ponder this deranged NYT comment on a Times story about the film:
Yikes. Yeah, a musical spin-off of “The Wizard of Oz” would have overcome the epic incompetence of the Harris campaign if only it had been released earlier. That may be the wackiest excuse for Trump’s win yet.
A social media commentator called Caesar listened to a long, long podcast exploring the Harris loss with her chief advisors and the architects—if you can call them that without choking—of her campaign, then summarized what he heard here. His summary is too long to summarize on Ethics Alarms, and based on the little I could stand listening to of the podcast, it seems accurate.
The major ethical use of the jaw-dropping results is as a perfect example of the Ethics Alarms motto, “Bias makes you stupid,” in its full, destructive, mind-blowing glory. There is denial and delusion here in abundance, beginning with Caesars first two summaries of what he heard in the post mortem:
The campaign was perfect, and
Harris was perfect.
They also tell you how warped the perception of these presumably intelligent people was and is.
Another unavoidable takeaway from the summary is that Democrats and progressives should be terrified about the prospects for their party if this stunning blindness is typical of their compatriots. They literally don’t understand, not merely why they lost, but also the nation, American society, our culture, our history, Donald Trump, how to process unwelcome data, the essential skills of self-examination and learning from mistakes, and more.
The summary also supports a conclusion I came to shortly after Kamala Harris was installed as Biden’s replacement as the Democrat’s Presidential nominee. The party will never be able to nominate a male, especially a white male, again until a woman finally is elected President. Like General Burnside’s doomed troops at the battle of Fredericksburg, it will keep charging up the hill with inadequate forcesas if there is realistic chance of victory though each failed charge makes the odds worse.
I re-watched “White Christmas” last night in preparation for this year’s posting of my annual guide to the film, which will show up here some time in the next few weeks. I noticed quite a few details that I missed in previous viewings, including the material for a terrific (and tough!) trivia question that I have never seen posed before. Ready?
What 1930s film star appeared in both “It’s a Wonderful Life” and “White Christmas”?
The Hollywood version of the Broadway cult musical “Wicked” appears to be a holiday box office smash. I suppose I’m going to have to see it, though “Wizard of Oz” worship alienated me long ago and how they can justify making a two hour, 45 minute film of just Act I of a three hour musical mystifies me. However, there is something to be learned from the nanny state’s British Board of Film Classifications (BBFC) felt that it had to put out these ridiculous trigger warnings for what is essentially a family movie:
Here is the Comment of the Day, an illustrative reminiscence from Michael R. in response to the post, “Unethical Tweet Of The Week: President-Elect Donald Trump (Sigh!).” It requires no further introduction…
***
Well, for 4 years, the federal government, the media, academia, and Hollywood have called me a far right extremist (and a lot worse). Federal agencies have training that lists Christians, white heterosexuals, etc. as domestic terrorist threats. These are the rules now. As long as the left thinks that they can treat their political opponents as threats to democracy, as bigots, and as domestic terrorists without ever being treated similarly by their political opponents, nothing will change.
It is being reported that 30 tech company founders have recently been de-banked. This comes after thousand or tens of thousands of other conservatives have been de-banked for their personal beliefs or political affiliation. If you are a conservative, you can’t become a teacher (the teacher ed programs have viewpoint interviews), you can’t get government internships (you need to volunteer for leftist organizations as part of the pre-reqs), and you will have a hard time going to law school. Med School will soon be an impossibility with the current leftist ideology being pushed. As long as there are no consequences for the left, there will never be support to stop such viewpoint discrimination.
When I was in college, I found out that one of my classmates had been sleeping in the lobby of the dorm for several weeks. Her roommate had moved her boyfriend into the dorm room and they wouldn’t let her in. When she went to the RA and the dorm director, they told her that “You two are both adults, you just need to discuss it and work it out”. She was frustrated because the roommate would not compromise on this. I laughed and said “Why should she? She has everything she wants and there are no downsides for her. What are YOU going to do about it?” So, I asked a freshman football player to go to her dorm room, pretend to be her boyfriend and ‘discuss’ the matter with the roommate and boyfriend. Well, he brought along the entire offensive line. Once he announced that he was her boyfriend, the roommate’s boyfriend fled. The roommate left school the next week. Nothing will change unless there are consequences.
Ethics Alarms 