1. The former reliably progressive, Democrat-supporting Rolling Stone reporter Matt Taibbi nicely exposed the Washington Post’s astoundingly flagrant Democratic operative Phillip Bump (EA dossier here) on Taibbi’s substack. (I have been temped to subscribe, but…)
In “Note to Philip Bump: The Washington Post columnist speaks on CNN; a brief reply” he writes:
The jersey worn by baseball legend Babe Ruth when he “called his shot” in Game 3 of the 1932 World Series sold over the weekend for $24.12 million, setting the auction record for most expensive sports collectible. The previous record price for any sports collectible was the $12.6 million that a rare mint condition Topps 1952 Mickey Mantle card fetched in 2022. Babe’s jersey far eclipsed the $10.1 million a Michael Jordan Chicago Bulls jersey from Game 1 of the 1998 NBA Finals achived at auction that same year, the record for athletic attire until Babe broke it, like he shattered so many records when he was alive.
The sale raises many ethics issues, but the main one is that the exorbitant price is almost certainly based on a fabrication, a lie. It is similar to paying millions for the axe little George Washington used to cut down his father’s cherry tree.
Today the Times published another in its continuing reporting efforts to demonize Israel, encourage anti-Semitism, support the unconscionable Biden -Harris pressure on Israel to agree to a ruinous cease-fire, and to validate Palestinian terrorism. The Ethics Alarms commentary on this piece is essentially identical to what appeared in its predecessor, As the NYT Enables Terrorism and Anti-Israel Hate With “Think of the Children!” Porn…which stated in that the Times report…
“…can evoke no possible response from typical semi-attentive and easily manipulated readers than “Think of the children! The Jews are monsters! Cease fire now! The Gazans have suffered enough! Justice for Palestine!”
And this is exactly the end result that Hamas sought when it launched its cease-fire shattering surprise terror attack on Israeli civilians, including infants, on October 7.”
The instant ethics train wreck, courtesy of The Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman Ethics Train Wreck, The Ferguson Ethics Train Wreck, The George Floyd Freakout, the Obama Administration Ethics Train Wreck, the DEI Ethics Train Wreck and The Great Stupid, is described by Campus Reform, thusly:
A primarily black student group at the University of Missouri was recently forced to change the name of that it is planning on hosting. The Legion of Black Collegians reportedly intended to name [a back-to-school barbecue event] the “Welcome Black BBQ,” but was forced to change the name by the university administration. The event, which is scheduled to be hosted on Friday, will now be called the “Welcome Black and Gold BBQ,” a reference to the school’s colors. The group wrote in an Instagram post on Aug. 16 that it is “heartbroken” at the name change.
Ugh.
I woke up in the middle of the night to check something and found this rant on my Facebook feed:
So, just so we’re clear- I get it, you don’t like Kamala or Tim. Not your first choice, etc., etc.So, I ask you this as you hem and haw: cut into the only chance this country has to rid itself once and for all of an openly racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, incompetent tyrant who has given a voice to the worst parts of our culture; to keep this rapist and felon from returning to power, this time with people who are focused on carrying out his Agenda – Whatever might happen if we’re to have a Harris/Walz presidency, how in any possible way is that worse than what four more years of this man and what he represents can bring? HOW?To vote otherwise (Republican or Independent), to criticize to the point of damage, to abstain, is nothing more than serving one’s ego.By 2028 the world will gladly continue on after slicing up what remains of the United States of America, and while I understand every single one of your arguments regarding the history of this country – and agree with a good many of them – for all the reasons you want to see a future that has better things than the past, put down all your grievances, or at the very least anything that will prevent this duo from taking the reins and JUST GET THEM THERE.We can rightly start to work when we are sure there’s something left to work with, because if you don’t know that the alternative will leave us with less than nothing (and not for long at that), you’re complicit in a way that can not and will not be forgiven by history, your families and very likely, because chances are you are someone with a decent heart who gives a shit, yourself.Blue. That’s it. That’s all. Right now. Do it.
The writer is a much closer friend and of longer duration than the one I discussed in yesterday’s Ethics Quiz. He’s also in professional theater, but, believe it or not, is a lawyer—you know, the profession that supposedly reveres precision analysis. Another interesting wrinkle: he’s Jewish, and promoting a Presidential candidate who wants to impose a “permanent” cease-fire in Gaza. You may remember, and I’m certain he does, how the last supposedly permanent cease fire in Gaza ended, on October 7, 2023.
Michigan might have the most sinister and anti-American Democratic Party of all. It’s certainly a tough competition, with New York, Minnesota, Washington, California, D.C. and a few others in the race, but Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer is special (she was a particularly heinous enemy of civil rights during the pandemic) and any party that would allow someone like anti-Semitic Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib to run under its banner has decency and integrity issues.
The state just threw independent presidential candidate Cornel West off its ballot, and many conservatives and Republicans see evidence of a conspiracy to rig the election for KAmala Harris. “Call me paranoid if you wish, but it’s almost as if the Democrats don’t want voters to show up at the polls on November 5 and see the name of anyone from any party or no party at all on their ballots except for Kamala Harris,” writes P.J. Media pundit Jazz Shaw.
Michigan elections director Mark Brewer sent a letter to West’s campaign saying that his affidavit of identity submitted with his ballot application was “not properly notarized.” The affidavit was notarized in Colorado and had to be valid in that state to be valid in Michigan as well. “There were apparently a couple of boxes left blank and the notary public stamp for the affidavit was attached on a separate piece of paper rather than on the document itself,” Shaw reveals. More from Jazz, who concludes in part:
Yes, that was it. That was the entirety of the complaint. In fairness to the Michigan elections director, they did send West’s campaign a letter in late July giving him a couple of weeks to respond and West never responded. This should have all been able to be cleaned up easily, but it wasn’t so the Democrats pounced. The original complaint was filed by former Michigan Democratic Party Chairman Mark Brewer in case you’re wondering why I’m generically blaming “the Democrats” here.
So what’s the real reason behind all of this and why would the Democrats care about Cornel West? He wasn’t going to carry any states or win the White House. …But that doesn’t mean that Cornel West’s presence or absence might not have a significant impact on the final results. This would be particularly true in Michigan where the presidential race is tighter than razor wire…That’s the reality of what is going on behind the scenes….West was identified as a potential threat to Biden and now to Harris. So he had to go. They scraped up Mark Brewer to have someone pore over West’s ballot application documents with a magnifying glass and find some sort of flaw to use as a basis for their complaint….They found a compliant judge to go along with a trivial complaint over what amounted to a technicality and West was unceremoniously kicked to the curb. Welcome to the rough and tumble world of modern Democratic politics as they desperately scramble to maintain their hold on power at any cost.
The Democrats cheat, as we have seen repeatedly this year and before. That party, as it has mutated in the 21st century, indeed will do anything and take actions that once were regarded as unthinkable in the American political culture to continue its slow eradication of Constitutional government. This episode, however, is not an example of that.
Like the freaks at an old time carnival and the live eel-eating geek, this is a pretty disgusting display. The manager of an intern program for a “major global institution” asks permission from the New York Times Magazine’s advice columnist “The Ethicist” to offer full time positions based on race rather than performance. Of course, the manager never says “race,” what he says is that although the “more privileged” interns “appear to be” performing at a higher level than those “who come from less privileged backgrounds,” he wants ethical leave to make the final hiring decisions by “taking personal life circumstances” into consideration. In other words, he wants to discriminate against the white interns.
The euphemisms are so thick you best use a trowel to read the query, but NYU ethics professor Kwame Anthony Appiah not only follows his lead but also (predictably) goes to great lengths to rationalize what is an obvious appeal to DEI ideology. Permit me to dissect The Ethicist’s intellectual dishonest double-talk; this time I’ll have The Ethicist’s words in italics and mine in regular text:
We live in a class society.
Objection! “Class society” suggests that this is a formal, enforced system like India or Great Britain. The only classless societies, theoretically, are ideally-functioning communist societies, which don’t exist. The Ethicist exposes his bias immediately.
People who are rich in financial terms tend to be rich in cultural and social capital too: They have social assets, resources and connections. All these forms of advantage can contribute to an employee’s actual performance.
Appiah is assuming cause and effect when the distinction is unknowable. Families that make an effort to create social assets, cultural awareness and beneficial connections for their children tend to raise more successful children. Rich people don’t all become rich because riches have been providentially bestowed on them, but this is how The Ethicist frames the issue. After all, Karl Marx says it is so.
But they can also contribute to the employee’s perceived performance. People often make judgments about the intelligence of speakers on the basis of their accents, for example, and one form of cultural capital is having the accent of the white, educated, Northern-coastal, middle classes. So you can ask yourself whether your judgment about which of these interns is doing best has been shaped by features that don’t reflect the contribution they’re likely to make. You’re obviously alert to this possibility, because you write that the more privileged interns “appear” to be performing better; it’s worth thinking about whether you can identify evaluative measures that are less subject to this kind of bias.
Nice try. Because the inquirer used the equivocal “appear,” The Ethicist leaps to the conclusion that the real meaning was “the whte interns may not be as good as their performance indicates.” His bias is palpable. In jobs requiring communication, for example, clear and understandable speech is a significant asset, and legitimately so. Anyone seeking to rise in business who hasn’t dealt with the problem of an accent handicap has demonstrated a significant lack of industry and responsibility. Appiah just brushes away the importance of being able to be understood as a mirage. Baloney! Learn to speak clearly and well. If speaking clearly and well means learning to sound like a white, educated, Northern-coastal, middle classes individual, then do it. If you want to keep sounding like Snoop Dogg on principle, swell, but don’t come around whining about prejudice when you can’t get the jobs you want.
Raja Abdulrahim, the New York Times reporter who prepared and wrote the splashy A-Section feature story in today’s print edition, says in her linked bio that “I abide by The Times’s ethical journalism standards. That includes refraining from promoting or protesting issues related to my work.” Can she possibly believe this while writing a piece of “Poor Palestinians!” propaganda like “There Is No Childhood in Gaza”? [Note: This is a gift link from me to get you past the paywall]
I’ll give her the benefit of the doubt, I suppose; it’s the ethical thing to do. Her story, and the way it is written, however, can evoke no possible response from typical semi-attentive and easily manipulated readers than “Think of the children! The Jews are monsters! Cease fire now! The Gazans have suffered enough! Justice for Palestine!”
And this is exactly the end result that Hamas sought when it launched its cease-fire shattering surprise terror attack on Israeli civilians, including infants, on October 7.
Here we have another one of these stories that should be waved obnoxiously in anyone’s face who lectures you about blindly “following the science.”
For decades—really as long as I can remember—researchers have been telling us that moderate consumption of alcohol was not just safe but in fact beneficial. This wonderful news was welcomed by those who “needed a drink” after a hard day, or self-medicated with a glass of wine (or good scotch) before bedtime, or who tended to have just a bit more than a moderate amount of alcohol now, then, or frequently, but who’s counting?
Along comes a report from the Canadian Institute for Substance Use Research at the University of Victoria in British Columbia, Canada, that appeared a week ago in the Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs published by the Center of Alcohol & Substance Use Studies at Rutgers University in New Jersey. It announced, in essence, “Oopsie! All of us trained scientific researchers made just a teeny mistake in our previous studies on this topic, repeatedly, over and over, and for half a century or more!”
In 1995, when he was 31, Tim Walz, then a high school football coach and teacher in Alliance, Nebraska, was pulled over by a Nebraska state trooper for driving 96 miles per hour in a 55 m.p.h. zone. There was alcohol on the future Minnesota governor’s and pandemic Nazi’s breath and after Walz failed a field sobriety test and breath test, he was arrested and charged with speeding and driving while intoxicated.
Does it matter? Not the arrest or the drunk driving, in my view, not a single incident so many decades ago. I don’t know anyone who could not have been charged with driving while over the alcohol limit at one point in their lives or another: whether someone gets caught at this frequent violation is largely a matter of moral luck. Tempting fate repeatedly this way—moral luck can also get people killed—and driving while intoxicated when one is in a position of trust and authority is another matter.
By all accounts, Walz was properly accountable and remorseful. He agreed to plead to a reduced charge of reckless driving, a misdemeanor, and paid a $200 fine. He duly reported the incident to his Alliance High School principal, quit his extracurricular activities including the coaching, and offered to resign from his teaching job.
All good. The story just “resurfaced” as they say now, and “Republicans pounced.” I can’t blame them: the tale of George W. Bush’s DUI was held and played by the Democrats as an October Surprise-in-the-hole, and may have cost Bush the popular vote majority in the 2000 Presidential election. Nonetheless, the verdict here is that Walz’s DUI incident itself is irrelevant to his fitness as a potential Vice-President.
Ethics Alarms 