“bias makes you stupid”

Comment of the Day : Ethics Quote of the Month: Banned EA Commenter “David” (1)

/ Jack Marshall / 9 Comments

How ironic! A post spawned by a banned trolling commenter who called your host a “Trump-supporting fascist” generated excellent commentary and two outstanding Comments of the Day. Thus a disruptive and unethical visitor here actually helped to enrich the discussion and enlighten participants. I know I learned some things from Sarah B.’s excellent Comment of the Day on the post, the first of the two earning the honor.

Here it is, on “Ethics Quote of the Month: Banned EA Commenter ‘David’”…

***

While I cannot answer for lawyers, there are plenty of Trump deranged engineers, and we sure get trained in logic, critical-thinking, and evaluation of consequences of our thought processes. This training does not inoculate us from our own biases. Indeed, biases manage to short circuit the training.

Jack is fond of saying biases make us stupid, and certainly today’s society proves it. I cannot tell you how frustrated I get when a trained engineer tells me that electric cars will solve all our problems. No one with the training I went through should say that electric cars are a universal solution. They should be able to calculate life cycle pollution, understand vehicle weight issues with roadways, realize the limitations of battery technology, mineral scarcity, and electrical grid load. However, by the time we get our intensive training in logic, critical thinking, and more, we have also been inundated in “global climate change” mass hysteria. The biases I saw my fellows come out with was amazing, even as I was standing there with the damn numbers.

Continue reading →

A Popeye: I Can’t Let This Idiotic AOC Tweet Pass…

/ Jack Marshall / 19 Comments

As Popeye so memorably said on more than one occasion, “It’s all I can stands, ‘cuz I can’t stands no more!” (Then he would swallow a can of spinach and beat the crap out of someone or something.)

From a 2021 report: “Democratic Senators in battleground states are raking in donations from out-of-state donors, amassing a hefty cash advantage over potential GOP challengers who haven’t launched Senate bids yet.  Four of the most competitive 2022 Senate races are in states held by Democrats: Arizona, Georgia, New Hampshire and Nevada. Each of the incumbents in those states received more than three-quarters of their campaign cash from out-of-state donors in the first three months of 2021.” 

Classic. A practice is “disgusting and abnormal” when it is aimed against Democratic Party incumbents, but just democracy at work when it benefits incumbents. And how is contributing to a political campiagn in a primary “corrupt”? AOC should stick with the old stand-by, since Jamaal Bowman is the incumbent in question. It’s racist not to support him.

Continue reading →

Ethics Quiz: Maryland’s Mass Pot Pardon

/ Jack Marshall / 14 Comments

This is an ethics quiz because I recognize that I am irretrievably biased on the question of marijuana (no, I really don’t care that I’m supposed to call it “cannabis” now: bite me), which I believe should continue to be illegal, though I am under no illusions that this metaphorical horse has left the barn for good.

Maryland’s governor Wes Moore signed an executive order yesterday that pardons more than 175,000 convicted drug-abusers whose crimes were related to marijuana use. Moore said he did this “with deep pride and soberness.”

Yes, he’s proud to announce that Maryland doesn’t think violating laws is anything anyone should be ashamed of.

“Today is about equity; it is about racial justice,” Anthony Brown, Maryland’s attorney general, said. “While the order applies to all who meet its criteria, the impact is a triumphant victory for African Americans and other Marylanders of color who were disproportionately arrested, convicted and sentenced for actions yesterday that are lawful today.” This is because a disproportionate number of blacks broke the pot laws. This in turn acculturated many of them into breaking other laws with impunity as well. The progressive rule is that if laws are violated by larger numbers of a minority group than their demographic presence in the population would predict, it is discriminatory to enforce those laws.

I wonder who thought up that dodge? Whoever he or she is, it’s brilliant.

Your Ethics Alarms Ethics Quiz of the Day is…

Is the Maryland pardon fair and responsible?

Continue reading →

Ethics Quote of the Month: Banned EA Commenter “David”

/ Jack Marshall / 35 Comments

“Fuck you, you Trump -supporting fascist!”

––Ethics Alarms troll “David” signing off after being banned

Why is this just an “ethics quote” instead of an “unethical quote”? I chose that designation because the line is invaluable information, revealing the crippling delusions at the heart of the implacable Trump-deranged that swarm around us.

“David” entered the fray here demonstrating some rhetorical ability and intelligence. It became clear, however, that he was here only as a hostile adversary and an advocate, not to explore ethics issues but to confront those whose analysis didn’t mesh with his pre-determined ideological and partisan biases, which proved unshakable. They also manifested themselves in trolling and sealioning tactics to relentlessly push a single narrative, the one that the news media, the resistance, Democrats and, to significant extent, Trump himself has fostered by his own incurable trolling habit.

The sequence that produced that quote goes like this. Trump is a bad person, and thus anything he is accused of, anything harmful that is predicted about his future conduct, any malign motives or intent that is attributed to him. must be true regardless of the sources and irrespective of facts. The confluence of these presumed vile acts, confident predictions and bad motives and intent points to racism, lust for power, instability, a thirst for revenge, and determination to topple the democracy. This, in turn, “proves ” that Trump is a super-villain out of Marvel Comics, and driven by fascist aspirations.

Continue reading →

Ethics Dunce and Legal Ethics Dunce: The Connecticut Bar Association

/ Jack Marshall / 5 Comments

This is concerning, but, frighteningly enough, not surprising. As Ethics Alarms has noted many times, the legal profession has been among the critical institutions most thoroughly corrupted, indeed lobotomized, by partisan bias and Trump Derangement. As if that wasn’t bad enough, I am also getting reports from various quarters about the deep corruption in many state bar associations. This is especially problematic for me, as bar associations are a significant market for my ethics training services (if they ares sufficiently corrupt, such organizations tend to say “We don’t need no stinkin’ ethics training!”). Well, the Connecticut Bar is in the minority of bar associations that have never sought my wisdom, so I am unencumbered by conflicts of interest.

Continue reading →

This Headline Tells You Everything You Need To Know About the Progressive Wing Of The Democratic Party…

/ Jack Marshall / 11 Comments

Jamaal Bowman. This Jamaal Bowman. The lying idiot who pulled a fire alarm to stall a floor vote in the House of Representatives and flagrantly lied about it, claiming he thought the “Pull” handle on the wall was there to open the door. After security footage showed him taking down the signs that contradicted his absurd story. And this Jamaal Bowman. He’s a star in the firmament of progressive Democrats. What must the rest of the metaphorical sky look like?

Yet the story quotes Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) saying, “I cannot think of a single race that better exemplifies the battle, frankly for our democracy, between everyday people choosing their representation and big money coming in and choosing it for them.” Yes, there we have the strange progressive definition of “democracy”: a member of Congress who stoops to sabotaging a legislative vote that his forces will lose, who lies about it, and who is given The King’s Pass by colleagues like AOC when he should have been prosecuted and censured. It’s not big money making the voters’ choice easy between Bowman and his Democratic primary foe, who is trouncing him in the polls. It is the inescapable fact that Bowman is incompetent, dishonest, unprofessional, not very bright, and a Hamas ally.

Continue reading →

Stupidity Tag On Fox News

/ Jack Marshall / 15 Comments

I had the TV on Fox News to keep my dog company, and was downstairs from my office briefly to get a drink when I heard a clip of Joe Biden saying, “The Supreme Court has never been more out of step.”

“Out of step?” What’s that supposed to mean? A President being stupid is bad, but a President who makes the public stupider is far worse. It isn’t the Supreme Court’s function to be “in step” with the times, polls, public opinion, fads or zeitgeist. It’s job is to interpret the law and the Constitution. Because the public’s understanding of the law is about at the same level as my dog’s understanding of “Two Gentlemen of Verona,” their opinion regarding what the Supreme Court should do is literally useless and of no value whatsoever.

The issue at hand was the SCOTUS decision on the bump stock ban discussed here. That opinion was only nominally about bump stocks: what it involved really was statutory construction and the limits of agencies trying to do end-arounds when laws don’t allow them to do what they would like to do.

Continue reading →

Father’s Day Morning Nausea, 2024 Election Ethics Train Wreck Edition

/ Jack Marshall / 14 Comments

Waking up this Father’s Day [Thanks, Dad, for 1) being such a terrific, selfless father 2) for continuing to be an inspiration, a role model and a guide during my highs and lows (like now), and everything in-between 3) for loving my wonderful mom and showing it so brilliantly to everyone, especially her, without interruption for almost sixty years; 4) for somehow saving so much money on a modest salary to hand over to my sister, me, and the three grandchildren through sacrifice and smart investing, because without it I would be living in a cardboard box right now, and 5) for surviving the Battle of the Bulge] to the near certainty that my son (who informed me last week that he would like me to refer to him/her/they as my daughter, Samantha. OK! ), is almost certain to ignore this rather contrived holiday (which is fine with me), a mystery in my yard in which someone or something keeps pulling the 15-foot-long heavy plastic, 7″ diameter tubing, installed to send runoff from the gutters into the garden rather than into my home’s foundation, off the down spout and dragging it into my neighbor’s yard, and another fight with a customer service rep, who, I swear, spoke exactly like Andy Kaufmann’s character on “Taxi” but faster than an auctioneer—yes, this IS a long sentence!—I sat down with Spuds to talk myself out of seppuku, drink a cup of coffee, and check what nonsense the various news networks were spouting.

Big mistake.

Continue reading →

From the Ethics Alarms “Conservatives Do Fake News Too” File…

/ Jack Marshall / 23 Comments

I really hate this stuff, and I’m getting sick of having to post on it.

Today I saw misleading click-bait headlines on various conservative blogs and websites were like this one: Woke California: U-Turn Signs Are Homophobic. There were many social media posts on accounts like “End Wokeness” with the same implication: those crazy LGPTQ fanatics are out of control, and are now even offended by regular traffic signs.

That was certainly my reaction to just reading the headlines. When I investigated—-my sock drawer is furious with me for using up our quality time together—I learned that the traffic signs removed by the LGBTQ community and the town of Silver Lake, California were considered homophobic because….the signs were homophobic.

In the 90s, before gay dating apps like Grindr, gays in Silver Lake (and elsewhere) relied on printed guidebooks to find public areas and gay bars where they could meet other men like them. “No U-Turn” and “No Cruising” signs were put up in parts of Silver Lake where residents had complained about gay men gathering. The signs were a—subtle? Not so subtle?—rebuke and warning.

The gay community in Silver lake has been trying for years to get official action approved to remove what the LA Times calls “signs of its anti-gay past,” and finally succeeded. None of the conservative websites that mocked this episode as hysterical hyper sensitivity mentioned the “No Cruising” signs in their headlines, and it’s obvious why. Seeing “No U-Turn” as an anti-gay message takes a little thought. “No Cruising”? I’ve never seen such a sign in my life. That one’s more obvious…so they buried it .

Deceit is one of the primary tools of fake news journalism.

If conservative blogs, news outlets and website have valid issues and points to make, they should be able to make them honestly by straightforward reporting. It is very disappointing to see a usually fair and reliable conservative commentary site like Legal Insurrection stooping to these tactics.

“The Ethicist” Is Persuaded By Pro-Abortion Double-Talk: 10 Observations

/ Jack Marshall / 5 Comments

I find the latest query posed to The Ethicist to have such an ethically obvious answer as to be unworthy of publication, unless the objective was to demonstrate how weak and intellectually dishonest ethical the position of pro-abortion advocates is.

Here it is:

I’ve always supported a woman’s right to choose, not least because legal access to abortion once saved me from an untenable situation. I also believe that if a woman chooses to abort, her wish should supersede any opposition to it by the father. The physical, practical and emotional effects on a woman obliged to carry a child to term (and to care for it afterward) are, in my view, far more significant than they are for the father.

But what about the reverse? What about a case in which the father (in this case, my son) is adamantly opposed to having a child, but the woman (his ex-girlfriend) wants to keep the pregnancy? While it’s not relevant to the moral question, the pregnancy is shockingly unexpected given a medical issue of the father’s. And the couple’s relationship has almost no chance of success, even without a pregnancy. Given that the woman has neither a willing partner nor a job and is already responsible for a child from a previous relationship, her decision to continue with the pregnancy is viewed by most in her circle as reckless and certain to risk her already precarious mental health. Here, her right to choose to carry the child will have a profound impact on three (soon to be four) people and is likely to be very difficult for all.

Is it right to force someone to be a parent, even if in name only? Many people, me included, would say no if that person is a woman. Recent events have shown how fraught this issue is. And yet a man who does not wish to be, has never wanted to be and was told that his chances of ever being a parent were nil can find himself in a situation where his opposition carries no weight. While it’s evident that he will have financial obligations, what might his moral responsibility be?

What a god-awful, ethically-obtuse letter to be send for publication, never mind circulated by an ethicist! Let’s see:

Continue reading →