Ethicist’s Diary: A Father Encounters His Son’s Ethics

Yesterday was my son’s birthday (also the anniversary of the Boston Red Sox finally winning the World Series after 86 years, but that’s just why I can remember my son’s birthday), but he gave me the best present: a window into his ethics and values.

I had barely seen Grant for several months, despite the fact that he has an apartment in the lower levels of our home; we’ve both been busy. When he came upstairs last night to get our birthday greetings and a few presents, he apologized for not being in closer touch, explaining that he had been promoted to a management position at the dealer where he is an auto tech.

He said that he had long been frustrated at the inefficiency and mismanagement there, and had set up a meeting with the vice-president to quit. They’ve invested a lot of training in Grant, and the exec said that they could pay him more money. Grant told his superior that his issue wasn’t the money, that his primary concern wasn’t what he was paid but what he could accomplish. (Uh-oh..ominous signs of paternal influence there…) He laid out the aspects of the operation that he found frustrating and unconscionable, and, Grant said, he “wasn’t very nice about it.” Then he described what needed to be done, and that he had suggested many of these solutions without seeing any action.

Continue reading

Unethical Quote Of The Month & Incompetent Elected Official Of The Month: House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries

“Many of these lawmakers on the other side of the aisle who had their hair on fire about what appears to have been an inadvertent action taken by Congressman Bowman, to which he is now being held accountable for, within the criminal justice system, regularly defend violent individuals who overran the Capitol on Jan. 6, as part of an effort to halt a peaceful transfer of power. And these violent individuals brutally beat and seriously injured 140 police officers, on the day of the insurrection. And many of them, who are having a panic attack, publicly, about Jamaal Bowman have actually defended or refused to comment on the violent mob on January 6.”

—House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), the man every Democrat in the House voted for to be Speaker, “explaining” why Rep. Bowman shouldn’t be censured by the House for breaking the law, indeed two laws, as well as violating the House ethics code. 

To be blunt, this statement by Jeffries exhibits the approximate ethical comprehension of a Cocker Spaniel. It reveals him to be a shameless liar and an ethics corrupter:

Continue reading

Schadenfreude Bonus: Watching Harvard Face The Consequences Of Its Own Hypocrisy and Corrupted Values

New Harvard President Claudine Gay can be expected to issue a fourth clarification of her initial reactions to the University’s large anti-Semitic contingent cheering on the Hamas massacre of Jewish citizens on October 7. To read Gay’s inaugural speech upon becoming the new president of America’s oldest and most storied educational institution, one would think “all is well” at Harvard, as Faber College student Kevin Bacon futilely screamed in the epic finale of “Animal House.” In marvelous ramalama-dingdong fashion, the standard issue race-obsessed progressive scholar babbled, predictably as Harvard’s first black President, about “this institution’s long history of exclusion and the long journey of resistance and resilience to overcome it.” Then she proved incapable of reacting forcibly when Harvard’s long history of anti-Semitism suddenly revealed itself not to have been resisted enough. Indeed, Harvard’s relentless efforts at woke indoctrination guarantee that it will flourish.

As discussed here, 31 Harvard campus organizations famously announced that Israel was fully responsible for all the violence erupting in and out of Gaza. Then, after efforts were made to reveal the names of the participating pro-terrorism and historically ignorant students so potential employers could cross them off their lists, we learned how well Harvard imbues its students with the ethical virtues of integrity, accountability, honesty, loyalty and prudence, along with such enabling virtues as fortitude, courage, and sacrifice. At least ten of the groups announced that they no longer endorsed the letter, now that there might be consequences attached to signing it. Some student members swore that they never approved the letter that their groups signed; others proclaimed that they didn’t really mean to say what the letters said, or that they hadn’t read it carefully.

Got it: you’re incompetent, irresponsible and cowardly fools. These reactions do not enhance your attraction as potential employees.

Continue reading

Unethical Quote Of The Month: Barack Obama

“The Israeli government’s decision to cut off food, water and electricity to a captive civilian population threatens not only to worsen a growing humanitarian crisis; it could further harden Palestinian attitudes for generations, erode global support for Israel, play into the hands of Israel’s enemies, and undermine long term efforts to achieve peace and stability in the region….”

—–Former President Barack Obama, sticking his nose into a matter that he should have no say in, and further enhancing his established record as a foreign policy incompetent.

The former President’s advice comes in an annoying post on Medium titled, “Thoughts on Israel and Gaza.” Primarily, his comments are stupid, but individuals with out-sized influence on public opinion, like irrationally popular ex-Presidents, have an ethical obligation to avoid allowing their stupidity to infect public affairs. How could anything “further harden Palestinian attitudes for generations” when for generations Palestinians have wanted to kill as many Jews as possible and wipe their nation from the map? Is Obama warning Israel that they risk really, really making Palestinians hate them? And nothing Israel does that isn’t suicidal will assist “efforts to achieve peace and stability in the region.” There will be peace and stability when the Palestinians genuinely condemn terrorism and accept that Israel is a legitimate nation…in other words, never.

Continue reading

Alternate Titles: 1. “Coke Says ‘Never Mind!'”; 2. “One Down, Thousands To Go” 3. “Black Lives Matter? We Have No Idea What You’re Talking About!”

This is what George Will likes to call “condign justice.”

Coca-Cola was one of thousands of corporations large and small to leap onto the George Floyd Freakout bandwagon and endorse Black Lives Matter even though it should have been obvious that the group was 1) racist 2) Marxist 3) violent and 4) a scam. Now is reaping the consequences it so richly deserves, as BLM has, naturally, come out in support of Hamas’s terror attack on Israel.

Many who were disgusted (like me) at the transparently cynical and opportunistic toadying by the corporate sector when it realized bashing police and demonizing whites was cool have been quick to point out Coke’s transgression. Here’s an example:

Coca-Cola’s reaction, cowards and ethics-free louses that they are, has been to quietly remove all references to BLM from the company’s website, where it once boasted of its financial support (now doubtless being used to fund one or more of the BLM leaders’ extravagances). Here’s the page: no mention of Black Lives Matter in sight.

Continue reading

An Ethics Obituary For Mitt Romney

Guest Post by Steve-O-in NJ.

[This is a comment posted by Steve-O in response to the post, “KABOOM! I Have To Take Back Every Positive Thing I Ever Said About Mitt Romney.” Properly it would be a Comment of the Day, but I decided that in both theme and length it deserved to be a free-standing guest post. I know comments are usually written with less precision than the authors might apply if they knew they were going to be highlighted—I know my comments are—so I did edit Steve’s work a bit, not substantively, and I hope he approves. JM]

I don’t know if this is even worth talking about very much, since Romney is headed toward the door and will exit as an also-ran. In his day, he amassed quite an impressive resume, certainly much more impressive than Barack Obama’s. He did a reasonably good job as governor of Massachusetts. That’s why it strikes me as odd that he did not run an effective presidential campaign, nor did he seem to grasp that campaigning on the national stage in 2012 was very different than campaigning 20, 10, or even 5 years before that.

The other side had one goal, and they stuck relentlessly to it: destroy Mitt Romney, by all means fair or foul. Positive campaigning has been pretty much dead since the days of Bush the Elder. It’s negative campaigning that moves the numbers, and Romney didn’t seem to grasp that. He tried to run a gentlemanly campaign when the other side and the media were prepared to fight as dirty as possible. This country didn’t give a damn about his resume or his plan for fixing the economy, at least not enough. They wanted things to be better, but Mitt just couldn’t make his case.

Continue reading

Comment Of The Day (3): “Perplexed Ethics Thoughts On This Video…”

Behold the third in a series of Comments of the Day on the post about the woman who started screaming as her measure response to a speaker whose opinions she didn’t want to hear, and has ordered out of her “gayborhood.” This one is by Sarah D (the others are here, and here); the inspiration was the post, “Perplexed Ethics Thoughts On This Video…”:

***

Assuming that this man is preaching peacefully on a street corner, even if he is stating things this woman disagrees with, and she came up and accosted him (perhaps not fair assumptions), her screaming like this seems to me to be res ipsa loquitor on the matter.

As for how we can engage people like that, well, I think what we need to do is treat them the way I treat my four year old when she engages in such behavior. However, I do not believe the law allows me to ask a person over the age of eighteen (I refuse to call this woman an adult) to stand in a corner, be grounded, scrub baseboards, or be spanked. If my eldest, still in single digits, acted like this, I’d never have to clean my house again.

Continue reading

“When Is The Best Apology The Worst Apology?”….The Trilogy! Plus An Addition To The Apology Scale

Unbelievable! Never did I suspect, when I wrote the post about the ridiculous, racist, vicious terrorism-supporting professor Mika Tosca, that her insultingly insincere and dishonest apology would become the model for Jew-haters now crawling out of the ooze of 2023 corrupt progressivism. And yet…here we are! This morning I posted about Beverly Hills doctor Andrew Thierry, who posted on on Instagram that “Zionists are gynocidal, demonic, greedy, pedophilic retards,” and then expected us to believe that his words were misunderstood, and he was sorry for that. Now we learn that, to channel the doomed character Randy in the “Scream” films, that we aren’t merely dealing with an ethics horror sequel, but a trilogy. For Cornell University history professor Russell Rickford, who said that he was ”exhilerated” over Hamas killing babies, children and civilians in its October 6 sneak terrorist attack and taking hostages too, is now trying to apologize…because he senses that his job might be in jeopardy. So he’s lying.

Continue reading

Next, SAG-AFTRA Will Tell Its Members To Paint Themselves Blue And Wear Ducks On Their Heads…

I would quit any union that started behaving in the fascist manner of The Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists.

The labor union representing approximately 160,000 media professionals worldwide is currently on strike, and as labor unions seem inclined to do, is making nutsy-cuckoo demands of its members. They have been assimilated, after all, and resistance is futile.

Yes, as that graphic from the unions shows, members have been told that they are doing a bad, anti-labor thing by dressing up as characters from “struck content,” meaning any movie or TV show, recent or ancient. That means they can’t be King Kong, Dracula (but a generic vampire is OK), Abe Lincoln, or Barbie, or else.

Morons. Worse than that, autocratic morons abusing their power.

Continue reading

Finally, The Evidence That Proves “Shoeless Joe” Wasn’t Just An Innocent Dupe (And That Hollywood Has Been Glorifying A Creep)

Don’t you love it when new evidence is discovered that casts new light old historical controversies, or better yet, show that the popular version of history is dead wrong?

A long-buried trial transcript that has been withheld from public consumption for almost a century has finally been published. The case was Joe Jackson v. Chicago American League Baseball Club, a two week trial held in Milwaukee in early 1924. “Joe Jackson, Plaintiff, vs. Chicago American League Baseball Club, Defendant—Never-Before-Seen Trial Transcript” thoroughly disproves the popular image of Shoeless Joe Jackson, the greatest player among the eight Chicago White Sox players who were banned from the game for life after accepting money from gamblers to throw the 1919 World Series.

According to “Field of Dreams” (which also has the .400 batting left-handed hitter hitting right-handed) Joe is wise, passionate, and dedicated to the game. “Eight Men Out” the 1988 film about the scandal, based on author Eliot Asinof’s 1963 book, shows Jackson as an illiterate scapegoat who was not involved in the planning of the scheme and who only agreed to participate after the fix was in, The movie shows a conflicted Jackson telling “Black Sox” manager Kid Gleason that he does not want to play in the first game of the Series. Gleason orders Joe onto the field.

Continue reading