Character

Ethics Quiz: The Star’s Apology

/ Jack Marshall / 6 Comments

Last month, actress Susan Sarandon became a deserving casualty of the Hamas-Israel Ethics Train Wreck after she spoke at at a pro-Palestinian rally and said that American Jews feeling threatened by the pro-Hamas protesters, demonstrators and rioters (like the Cornell students who had to hide in their dorms)were “getting a taste of what it feels like to be a Muslim in this country, so often subjected to violence.” This epically stupid comment got her dropped by United Talent Agency, whose management is Jewish. As I noted here, “the agency concluded, probably accurately, that Sarandon’s comments diminished her value to them, and perhaps having a pro-terrorism client might deter more rational artists from seeking their aid.”

Apparently Sarandon, who has progressed through her romantic lead stage into and out of her mother role stage and now is getting grandmother parts isn’t quite ready to hang up her acting spurs, and decided that she had made a potential career-ending mistake that needed fixing. So she has now issued this apology:

Your first Ethics Alarms Ethics Quiz of December is…

Is her apology sincere, trustworthy, and sufficient?

Continue reading →

Ethics Dunce: The Federalist

/ Jack Marshall / 17 Comments

I could easily make this an Unethical Quote of the Month post too.

I had fondly hoped that I had written my last sentence about the disgusting blight on the republic that calls himself “George Santos,” but no: I just read the ethics-free, Machiavellian, “the ends justify the mean” protest by The Federalist titled, “George Santos’ Expulsion Is Further Proof The GOP Is A Potemkin Political Party.” One of the supposed media flagships of conservative thought has announced that if the Republican Party really cared about conservative principles, it would happily allow a dishonest, untrustworthy, and stunningly dumb Congressman elected under false pretenses remain in Congress under their banner, because they need him to “tackle” the “aforementioned”crises plaguing the country.”

It is a disgusting, indefensible, unethical position, demonstrating that the Democratic Party’s ethics rot has spread. Consider these excerpts:

Continue reading →

On His Way Out, Rep. Santos Kindly Demonstrates Why

/ Jack Marshall / 9 Comments

The House just voted 311 to 114 (with two cowardly members voting “present”) to make New York Congressman George Santos only the sixth in history to be deemed unworthy of an elected seat. The GOP members mostly supported the draconian punishment despite facing a tough race in the special election Santos’s disgrace now triggers. If I were a voter in that Long Island and Queens district, I’d be tempted to vote for the Democrat just to make the Republican Party pay for allowing a fraud and a crook like Santos to be its nominee. Of course, the Democrats and the local news media also share some blame for not doing due diligence to uncover important facts about a wildly unqualified candidate, but the GOP has to be first in line to be held accountable after Santos himself.

Yesterday, facing his likely humiliation, the biggest phony ever elected to Congress put his essential sliminess on full display, vowing revenge on his party and, like so many villains in movies about conspiracies and corruption, swearing that ‘if I go down, I’ll take all of you down with me!’

“I will do the same thing that members did to me and go to the Office of Congressional Ethics, all throughout today and tomorrow and report, everything that I think is relevant to the committee for them to look into,” said Santos. He’s already promised to file a complaint about the ridiculous Rep. Jamaal Bowman, the Mad Fire Alarmist. Yes, Bowman should be sanctioned, but compared to Santos he’s John Quincy Adams.

Santos’s reaction to being expelled is a stinking pile of rationalizations, as discussed here. His pledge to get revenge is another bit of signature significance. If Santos had any ethical instincts at all, any concept of why he was being kicked out of Congress, any flicker of conscience, dignity, responsibility or decency, he would have exited with a statement expressing his regret for his past actions, apologizing for soiling (well, further soiling) the reputation of the body he was elected to serve in, and promising to devote his future activities to honorable public service, while acknowledging that there is, at this time, no reason to believe him. Then it might have been said of his leaving Congress, in the manner of Malcolm’s description of MacBeth at his execution,

Nothing in his life
Became him like the leaving it.

But George Santos doesn’t possess those character traits: he’s a throbbing sociopath, and unlike more successful sociopaths in our government, he’s not smart or wily enough to hide it.

Ethics Hero: Senator Chuck Schumer

/ Jack Marshall / 6 Comments

Schumer, as the nation’s highest ranking elected official of Jewish heritage, is the ideal official to call out the Left’s rampant anti-Semitism that has been exposed since the October 6 Hamas attack on Israel. Doing so involved considerable political risks, and frankly, I didn’t think he had the guts to do it. Yesterday, however, Schumer delivered an impassioned speech in the Senate condemning members of his own party and ideological persuasion for “unknowingly aiding and abetting” anti-Semitism in the name of social justice, and thus fueling bigotry against Jews as Israel battles for its survival against Hamas.

Continue reading →

Hey, I’m Calm! Stuff Like This Doesn’t Bother Me At All. I’m Just An Uninvolved Observer.

/ Jack Marshall / 8 Comments

And happy!

See?

Stories like this one coming up—another Great Stupid epic, again with links to the George Floyd Ethics Train Wreck—have been proliferating lately. When I first saw the headline on a report that D.C.’s black, woke, totally incompetent mayor Muriel Bowser had “re-painted” her insane giant Black Lives Matter mural, confirmation bias kicked in: I read it to mean that she had finally removed the insulting monstrosity by having it painted over. I was even preparing a post about how trying to undo a massive ethics botch often calls attention to what was so wrong in the first place, and that in this case, Bowser was in ethics zugzwang because so many of her residents are still blind Black Lives Matter supporters, aka. anti-white, anti-police, anti-America racists.

But that’s not what the story said. The real story is that Bowser chose now to spruce up the huge, infamous street mural shouting “Black Lives Matter” that she had painted in 2020 as BLM mobs were “mostly peacefully” demonstrating through the city and the nation, at times confronting white D.C. diners and demanding that they pledge fealty to the Marxist movement. The refurbishment cost $271,231, including $217,680 in labor costs and $53,551 in paint supplies.

Continue reading →

From Trump Crony Roger Stone, New Vistas In Shameless Deceit

/ Jack Marshall / 10 Comments

The fact that Roger Stone supports Donald Trump and that Trump regards him as a friend, advisor and ally is almost enough, all by itself, to justify refusing to vote for Trump no matter who or what he runs against next. Stone, about the slimiest denizen in a scum-filled profession that includes such slimy practitioners as Dick Morris and Lanny Davis (that is, political consultants and operatives), stooped to a new low by calling the wife of Trump rival Ron DeSantis a “cunt” in the coded Twitter/X message above.

I did not know, prior to this incident, about the social media-speak “SeeUNextTuesday,” which means “cunt” like “Let’s go Brandon!” means “Fuck Joe Biden.” It’s pretty obvious, once you think about it, and gutter-level political rhetoric (though HBO allowed Bill Maher to use the term outright when GOP women were the target.). Stone, however, human fungus that he is, added to his ethics foul by denying that he called Casey DeSantis a “cunt,” tweeting ““NOT what I said! Typical @mediate smear.” (The mostly left-leaning political website had stated that “Stone Calls Casey DeSantis a C***,” though it wasn’t the only news source reporting the slur.)

Continue reading →

Guest Column: Shoplifting Ethics

/ Jack Marshall / 16 Comments

by Sarah B.

[Introduction: This excellent post by Sarah B, who has a history of them, posed a dilemma. It was originally posted in this week’s Open Forum, but the comment easily could have been a Comment of the Day on two recent posts, “Irony: The Washington Post Telling CVS How To Handle Rampant Shoplifting,” and “Technology Ethics Fail: Self-Checkout.”

In the end, I decided to publish it as a guest post, as Sarah herself told us up front what she was commenting on, writing, “This article, about a woman who wrote a piece for the newspaper anonymously about how and why she shoplifts, is worth discussing,” referring to “I’m a middle-class shoplifter – and here’s why I’m happy to confess it” in the UK’s Independent. Proving once again that valuable insights can be obtained from idiotic essays, Sarah’s post is far, far, FAR superior to the article that apparently spawned it. The explanation of “anonymous” about why she’s apparently “happy” about being a shoplifter was so devoid of either logic or ethics comprehension that it made my phantom hair hurt. Among her fatuous excuses and rationalizations were “It’s easy, so it’s the stores’ fault,” “I don’t even see it as shoplifting” (#64 on the rationalizations list, “It isn’t what it is”), “I’m owed it,” and #22, the worst rationalization of all, “It’s not the worst thing,” because she “would only do this in a supermarket chain, rather than any family-run small business.” People like the author make me want to chuck my business and profession and become a pimp or something. Why do I spend so much time on ethics when so many people think like this? Fortunately, Sarah had a different and more constructive reaction.—JM.]

***

First, there is no doubt that her actions are unethical, and while we could just analyze this as a “name the rationalizations”, I also think that a deep dive into the article can show many things about our society and make for a good discussion. There are options for discussing how she doesn’t shoplift because she has to, but does it to decrease the prices of expensive alternatives instead of paying for what she wants. However, I want to look at how I think we could combat her “how-to guide”.

This seems to me to be a great case study in “locks keep an honest man honest.” The author admits that much of her stealing is predicated on the app-shopping and self-checkout philosophy of big stores. My main proposal, after looking at this, is to somehow return to the “good old days” of customer service.

Continue reading →

Confronting My Biases, Episode 4: People Who Are Still Wearing Masks

/ Jack Marshall / 13 Comments

I can say right up front that I’m not getting over this one.

I am a bit less hostile if the mask-wearer is elderly, as I can imagine that they might be seriously immuno-compromised. But when I see a family with young children and they are all masked, I can only think “child abuse” and “morons.” Indeed, I am tempted to ask them what the hell they think they are doing.

Today, in Northern Virginia, I still see teens walking alone outside wearing masks. I still see clerks at my CVS wearing masks, often working side-by-side with maskless co-workers. Most of the masks I’m seeing now are not the medical-grade masks that might have some small value in preventing infection: they are primarily plain old cloth masks or paper masks, as in “useless.”

The mask-wearers are, I am certain, almost 100% woke, virtue-signaling knee-jerk progressives who would happily elect Kamala Harris as President if given the chance. Wearing the things is a political statement as much as anything else. I perceive the masked as gullible to government propaganda and media scare-mongering for political advantage. I view them as fearful, lazy and apathetic individuals who have completely rejected core American character traits, like risk-taking, autonomy and independence.

Perhaps most important of all, I view the wearing of masks now as a deliberate signal that the individual does not want to interact with me, the community or society. I can’t read their expressions; when they talk, it is muffled and I have trouble hearing them. For me, they might as well be wearing paper bags over their heads.

I believe the masked among us are eroding the vital inter-relationships, human contact and communication that makes society enjoyable and productive.

No, I’m not getting over this bias.

I’m not even sure it is a bias.

KABOOM!! Apparently There Is No Criminal Law To Charge This Police Detective Under

/ Jack Marshall / 9 Comments

Most of the reader comments on this New York Times story are the same: “Why isn’t he in prison?”

Former NYPD detective, Louis N. Scarcella has been shown to have rigged more than a dozen investigations leading to successful prosecutions and imprisonment. Scarcella was a legendary detective in the Brooklyn North homicide squad in the 1980s and ’90s. Before he retired in 1999, he was renowned for solving murder cases when his colleagues failed. Now it is becoming apparent how. He rigged the investigations, manufactured confessions and fabricated evidence.

Defense attorneys accused him of coaching witnesses, and not just coercing false confessions but sometimes inventing them. A Times investigation discovered that confessions by defendants in different cases contained identical language. Witnesses frequently changed their accounts after Scarcella met with them. But it was not before more than a decade had passed that his methods were fully exposed, along with many false convictions.

Continue reading →

Ethics Quiz: The Dominatrix Congressional Candidate Principle?

/ Jack Marshall / 9 Comments

Yikes.

Courtney Casgraux, 41 (above), describes herself as an international businesswoman as she runs for a seat in the United States House of Representatives for Oregon ‘s first district. Casgraux’s campaign, launched last spring, was rocked over Labor Day weekend when her past occupation as a BDSM dominatrix was revealed via video on Reddit. Casgraux was outraged. “To shame me for something that helped create the life that I have today where I have opportunity … made me really mad. Because it felt like an attack on women, not just an attack on me,” she said.

Really? Letting the public know about the past activities of a Congressional candidate is wrong? Interesting take, Madam.

In response, Casgraux says she is “reclaiming her sexuality” though a campaign collaboration with Playboy. Sure, why not? Remember, she’s running in Oregon. Did I mention what party she belongs to? Do I need to?

On Instagram the former-dominatrix wrote,

First and foremost, I would like to thank Playboy for giving me the opportunity to express what freedom means to me and welcoming me into the Playboy family. Over the last month Playboy has not only championed me but my Congressional Campaign. I’m looking forward to utilizing my platform to educate, uplift voices and fundraise for those less fortunate. My journey with Playboy is just beginning so be on the lookout for more things to come.

Boy, I can’t wait. She continued, “Secondly, I’m reclaiming this American Flag and what it represents, and that’s FREEDOM AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.” (Actually, that’s “liberty and justice for all,” but never mind…)

Her campaign website further elaborates: “As a fiercely independent single mother who has had to navigate the adversities of life, I understand firsthand the struggles that American families face on a daily basis.” OK, she’s an Oregon Democrat: can you guess her platform without peaking? Yes, she wants to secure LGBTQ “rights and equality,” guarantee “abortion rights” nationwide, pass “comprehensive gun reform” and take “immediate action on climate change.”

Your Ethics Alarms Thanksgiving Ethics Quiz is,

Should her dominatrix past be held against her by voters?

Continue reading →