Friday Rainy Day Open Forum

I used to complain about how much of Northern Virginia winters were spent in the rain, but the deluge overnight here, which is going to restart any minute, could not be more welcome. My neighborhood has been iced-over for weeks, with snow on the ground longer than any time during my decades long residence. (Naturally, this is just more evidence of climate change and global warming, “experts” say, and they know best.) The warm rain is ending that, meaning that walking my over-enthusiastic dog, Spuds, will no longer be life-threatening…at least not as life threatening.

I have too many things I want to write about, and as always, I am hoping to find some guest posts (as in “you write about it so I don’t have to” posts) here today when the dust settles. Olympics ethics stories will be especially welcome, because I refuse to watch the hypocritical spectacle or read about it unless someone sends me a tip. I am very tempted, however, to write about Elaine Gu, the all-American super-star skier who competes representing China in this Winter Olympics. According to the Wall Street Journal, Gu and Zhu Yi, a fellow American-born figure skater who now competes for China, were paid a combined $6.6 million by the Beijing Municipal Sports Bureau in 2025 for “striving for excellent results in qualifying for the 2026 Milan Winter Olympics.” In all, the two were reportedly paid nearly $14 million over the past three years. The payments were revealed when the Beijing Municipal Sports Bureau budget was posted online with the names of Gu and Zhu. Their names have since been scrubbed from the public report.”

Nice. Gu is revolting, and it also proves how far the Olympic have come from their original roots of extolling amateur athletic competition. Gu still is paid by some American corporations to be their sponsors. They are also revolting. Gu’s betrayal of her own nation raises the ethical issue of dual citizenship. She’s a great walking, talking, greedy, ethically-inert example of why we shouldn’t allow it.

But don’t get me started. You get started…

Comment of the Day: “Ethics Quiz: Rep. Fine’s ‘Islamaphobic’ Quote”

[Apologies to all: I was so eager to get Steve’s Comment of the Day up that I forgot to add the headline!]

The historically literate, unrestrained Ethics Alarms veteran commenter Steve-O-in NJ returns to the familiar (to him) Comment of the Day podium making the case that Rep. Fine was not being one bit unreasonable and certainly not “Islamophobic” when he responded to a New York City Muslim activists assertion that dogs should not be kept as pets in the Big Apple with the quip, “If they force us to choose, the choice between dogs and Muslims is not a difficult one.”

In casual conversation about Fine’s line (not to be confused with “a fine line” ) I have yet to encounter anyone who doesn’t feel he got the better of the exchange. One lawyer friend, known for his combative courtroom style, opined that the woman’s ‘Islam is right that dogs are dirty’ remark was such a metaphorical hanging curve ball that it would have been unethical not to hit it out of the park.

Here is Steve-O-in-NJ’s Comment of the Day on the post, “Ethics Quiz: Rep. Fine’s ‘Islamaphobic’ Quote”:

***

Islamic attitudes toward dogs vary. Some think of them as okay to use as working animals (herding, hunting etc.), but not pets. Judaism also for a time was anti-dog, and I think that ported over to Islam, same as the rule against pork.

I for one have never owned a dog, but I have known many, and I think they are useful in a number of ways, including as companion animals. They assist the disabled, protect and direct livestock, find people (or bodies), save those stranded on mountains, assist the emergency services, and even tow carts with Christmas trees or other evergreen decorations (the Bernese Mountain Dog is the usual breed for this). I’ll take a large gentle dog or an affectionate energetic dog (little yappy dogs are not my thing) over a hyper-religious neighbor who wants to tell me what to do any day. I’ve said a few times that Islam is not compatible with Western values, and this is just one other reason why it isn’t.

Ethics Observation on the Larry Bushart Fiasco

Do read this New York Times story [gift link]about Larry Bushart, a progressive Facebook addict who was arrested and spent 37 days on jail after being arrested on the theory that a meme he posted (that he didn’t create) was a “true threat” and thus a felony. He was held on a two-million dollar bond. I mentioned the case last November, but had limited information then.

Believe it or not—I can barely believe it—the meme above is what got Bushart arrested! Eventually the charges were dropped, but understandably, the 61-year-old retired police officer isn’t posting memes on Facebook any more, and is hesitant to express his contrarian opinions on social media. In a real sense, his free speech has been “chilled” by state action…state action that was unethical, illegal, an abuse of discretion and power, and mind-numbingly stupid. It is also a cautionary tale.

Observations:

Ethics Quiz: The I.C.E. Endorsement

Sarai Jimenez, a special education teaching intern at in Pajaro Valley School District’s Watsonville, California-based MacQuiddy Elementary, endorsed the presence of I.C.E. officers in her town in a comment on Facebook last month.

“Yay!!! We need ICE in Watsonville!! It’s been getting out of hand,” Jimenez wrote, as you can see above. But the parents in Pajaro Valley Unified School District, where 84% of students are Hispanic and, given California’s sanctuary state aspirations, might belong to families with one or more illegal immigrants, considered Jimenez’s support for ICE….that is, enforcement of U.S. law…unconscionable. Many complained, and Jimenez was placed on leave from her job in Pajaro Valley School District. It appears that she will be fired, if she hasn’t been already.

“You can’t just tell the world how you feel and not expect repercussions from people because of how they feel about I.C.E.,” local parent Jorge Guerrero said. If I were awake completely, which I’m not, I would compose several alternate versions of this statement with provocative substitutes for “I.C.E.”

Jimenez tried to save her job by groveling a politician-style denial rather than an apology,“I’m sorry that the comment was taken out of context,” she told reporters. “But my actions speak so much louder than all those hateful bullies’ words.” The hateful bullies are the ones who bombarded her with threats and insults until she took down her Facebook page. “You are a shameful disgraceful disgusting woman,” one critic wrote.

Predictably, though apparently not by the interning teacher, the school administrators sided with the bullies if not their methods (although firing someone for supporting law enforcement is a lot more harmful than insulting her).

MacQuiddy Elementary Principal Sara Pearman said in a statement that Jimenez’s comment “does not reflect the values” of the school or district.

Hmmmm…

Your Ethics Alarms Ethics Quiz of the Day:

Is it ethical to fire Jimenez for expressing support for law enforcement officials doing their jobs?

I think this is a close call. Some points:

The N.F.L. Is Helping Chuck Klosterman’s Prediction Come True [Corrected]

I was going to get this up before the Super Bowl, but it turns out that the issue was further crystalized by the game itself. As happens approximately 50% of the time with this annual spectacle, the game was a yawn, and much of the news coming out of the contest involved the NFL’s deliberate transformation of what was once considered a unifying family cultural event, like Fourth of July fireworks, into a partisan, progressive statement about how America sucks, with expensive TV ads extolling capitalism and patriotism at the same time. That’s message whiplash, and ethically irresponsible.

As the New York Times explained, without criticism, the NFL took a hard turn Left when it put Barack Obama pal Jay-Z, the rap star and impresario, in charge of the Super Bowl halftime show after the 2018 Super Bowl had triggered anger from fans over players “taking a knee” during the National Anthem. The Times, spinning as usual, says that the kneeling was intended to “draw attention to police brutality and social justice issues.”

As Ethics Alarms pointed out at the time, none of the kneelers, including its cynical originator, over-the-hill quarterback Colin Kaepernick, ever explained coherently what they were kneeling about. What “police brutality”? Oh, you know, Mike Brown, whom Black Lives Matters still says was “murdered” on its website. What social justice issues? Oh, you know: it’s time for white people to be discriminated against to make up for slavery. The left-turn was a greed-induced mass virtue signal to blacks, clueless young fans, and Democrats. (It helped that President Trump vociferously attacked Kaepernick and Co., so the kneeling appealed to the Trump Deranged too. (See Dissonance Scale, Cognitive)

The Times:

My Head Just Exploded Over This News of the Corruption Of Our Legal System That I Didn’t Know About Because The Media Decided a “Today” Host’s FAMILY CRISIS IS MORE IMPORTANT…!!!

In case you can’t tell, I’m madly disgusted about this, “this” meaning both the episode I’m going to write about, and the fact that I didn’t hear or read about it immediately because of our incompetent, irresponsible news media deciding that their dumb audience would rather share feelings with Savannah Guthrie.

From the New York Times: [Gift link!]

“A former obstetrician-gynecologist at the University of California, Los Angeles, who was convicted in 2022 of sexually abusing patients must be given a new trial, a state appeals court said on Monday, overturning the former doctor’s conviction. The former doctor, James M. Heaps, 69, was sentenced to 11 years in prison in April 2023 after jurors in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County found him guilty of three counts of sexual battery by fraud and two counts of sexual penetration of an unconscious person. U.C.L.A. has already paid about $700 million to settle claims of sexual misconduct against Mr. Heaps, who was affiliated with the university in various roles from 1983 to 2018.

“A three-judge panel on the California Court of Appeal ruled on Monday that Mr. Heaps had been denied a fair trial because the trial judge never told Mr. Heaps’s lawyer or the prosecutors on the case about a note that the jury had sent while it was deliberating in October 2022.

The “Note to Judge” said that a recently seated alternate juror had “expressed to us that his limited English interfered with his understanding of the testimony, resulting in every case being the same, and his mind is already made up.”

Under the California Code of Civil Procedure, people who lack “sufficient knowledge of the English language” cannot serve on trial juries. The appeals court ruled that Mr. Heaps’s conviction must be overturned.”

“We recognize the burden on the trial court and regrettably, on the witnesses, in requiring retrial of a case involving multiple victims and delving into the conduct of intimate medical examinations,” the appeals court wrote. “The importance of the constitutional right to counsel at critical junctures in a criminal trial gives us no other choice.”

The Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office said in a statement that it planned to retry Mr. Heaps ‘as soon as possible.’ Mr. Heaps will be sent back to county jail, the office said, and a court could release him on bail.”

I will now pause a bit while you mop your skull and brain bits off your computer screen. I’ve found that Windex does a good job, though you have to pick up the bigger pieces with your fingers.

I Wonder How Often This Happens and In How Many Places…

Nominee for Unethical (and Stupid) Quote of the Decade: Someone At The Grammys, It Doesn’t Matter Who, Since The Audience Erupted In Cretinish Applause…

“No one is illegal on stolen land.”

—Okay, I do know who it was: Billie Eilish, accepting the Grammy for song of the year.

I can’t imagine why anyone would watch the Grammys, and find it even more unimaginable that anyone would care what these under-educated, bubble-dwelling narcissists think about anything, but as usual for this crowd, one after another stepped up to the mic last night and again proved the immortal wisdom of Laura Ingraham’s edict, “Shut up and sing!”

Eilish’s quote is legally, logically, historically and factually absurd, and yet progressives increasingly find it inspiring and persuasive, which should tell you all you want to know about the current state of that ideological malady. Eilish’s nonsense was the most catchy of the many open borders outburst of the night, but there were many others, like…

Fearmongering From The Left and Right, Part II: The Right

The doomsday rant below is the “Morning Report” today on Ace of Spades Headquarters, a lively Far Right blog with five contributors in addition to the mysterious Ace himself (or herself). This entry is written by J.J. Sefton, but the style on this site is very consistent, and I find the various contributors interchangeable in their venom. There is never any pretense of objectivity or balance here, though I often find the rhetoric entertaining. It would be fun to write a blog like this, but unethical. I generally avoid it so as not to be tempted by the Dark Side.

Here is the hard Right’s prediction of looming doom “unless”…

Good morning kids. As I and many of you for sure have pondered lo these many months going on perhaps years now if we are in a state of civil war, but for sure we are in a phase of accelerating societal breakdown. On the surface, life goes on much as it always has, kids go to school we go to work or otherwise go about our routines mostly as per usual. Beyond the violence and mayhem we are witnessing in Minneapolis and elsewhere, the most alarming aspect is the utter breakdown and corruption of our judicial system that has now been infiltrated and weaponized against us.

This here is madness and things like this more than even the open violent insurrection against law enforcement which not only represents President Trump and his policies but is supposed to represent our collective individual and societal liberties, rights and freedoms, will be and are indeed our undoing, in the here and now.

First, Judge Gregory Carro in New York State argued that Luigi Mangione, the leftist terrorist, wasn’t a terrorist because he said he wasn’t.. . . More of the same now at the federal level where Judge Margaret Garnett, a recent Biden appointee, decided that Luigi Mangione stalking Brian Thompson in order to kill him wasn’t a “crime of violence”. . . The only thing tortured and strange here is that Democrats are trying not to pretend that they’re bailing out a leftist terrorist. Had Luigi Mangione worn a red cap and hunted down and killed a liberal judge, all of a sudden all of these rulings would be the opposite of what they are, and the ‘tortured and strange’ parts of them would be the sound of the law creaking to be bent backward the other way.

You better believe that the ICE agents who took down Good and Pretti, should some Soros prosecutor get the ball rolling are going to get the Derek Chauvin treatment if not a cell on death row. Donald Trump and Kristi Noem as well. The DemoKKKrats are already making noises about impeachement should they win back Congress this coming November and beyond that, they are itching to see those two and others dangling from a hangman’s noose.

They’ve learned their lesson. Next time they will completely wipe out all opposition to them and seize absolute power. And anyone who objects will ironically and disgustingly be labeled as a terrorist and insurrectionist, and be subject to the harshest of penalties. Like J-6 the process will only be the beginning of the punishment.

It is clear that the Democrat Left has the ability and the willingness to mobilize an armed force of internal terrorists and insurrectionists who will do their bidding knowing they face no repercussions. At least no repercussions in the legal sense.

Can you imagine if average law abiding and armed citizens had a similar system to communicate and rapidly mobilize to be on scene to counter the criminal terrorist insurrectionists and stand shoulder to shoulder with law enforcement, or to oppose any Don Lemon squad of goons bent on invading a church service?

We are heading down that road. But considering our innate sense of morality (that has been completely burned out of the Left since childhood over the past 60 years or more) and concomitant abhorrence of violence, Perhaps it might never come to armed response.

We as a nation are coming to a crossroads. The Left uses our Constitution as both a shield and a cudgel. And bearing all of the aforementioned in mind, there’s this frightening development:
Democrats spent years pushing for gun restrictions. Now they’re rushing to buy firearms and invoking Second Amendment rights after federal agents killed a licensed gun owner in Minneapolis.

The shift has drawn accusations of hypocrisy from conservative critics. Writing in “The Hill,” columnist Robby Soave noted that progressives “favor all sorts of restrictions on gun ownership” yet now champion constitutional gun rights following Alex Pretti’s death. The ACLU even backpedaled on whether it supports concealed carry rights for protesters, Soave wrote. But, they will acquire and use firearms in an offensive manner and when the smoke clears claim self defense as a judge like the one who let Mangione off the hook and the one who railroaded Derek Chauvin will agree. When you have mayors and governors now openly going after and attempting to impede ICE and other federal agents from doing their duty, no doubt their armed Antifa goons and gang-bangers as in Long Beach CA will be deputized and given the full protection of a bastardized legal system. Unfortunately (or fortunately?) we cannot deny anyone their second amendment right to bear arms based on their political beliefs. But considering a frighteningly large number of individuals not only want to destroy America as founded but as we have seen not just in Minneapolis but since the 1960s are willing and able to use violence to achieve their aims. Worse the Democrat Party in its eternal quest to seize absolute power is giving them political and legal cover to act as their street goons/enforcers.

If by some chance their election rigging machine fails to deliver them control of Congress, what we’re seeing in Minneapolis is just a foretaste of what is to come that will be orders of magnitude worse. The President will be forced to respond and in so doing potentially play into their hands despite being completely in the right to quash an armed violent leftist/Democrat insurrection.

Friend and friend of the blog Mark Pulliam lays it all out in his latest piece, on his blog which is worthy of bookmarking and following:

“. . .What happens if the Republicans lose control of Congress in the mid-terms this November? We don’t have to wonder, because the Democrats have told us. Expect a 180-degree reversal of everything President Trump has done. We can expect as abrupt a change, on a national scale, as the radical onslaught incoming Governor Abigail Spanberger is imposing on the commonwealth of Virginia. Elections truly have consequences.

And if the Democrats re-gain the White House in 2028, things will be even worse. President Trump’s historic victory in 2024, and the MAGA agenda in general, will be foiled by the Democrats’ radical policies . . The Constitution, as we know if, would be shredded.”

And for me it would essentially be the end of even the veneer of the illusion of regular order/business as usual that we barely are able to delude ourselves into believing. They will go all out to seize absolute power, crush any and all opposition and that will be that. A run of 250 years as they traipse around in the skin suit for another century or so demanding respect.

Unless something radical changes the course of history back towards sanity. As we had hoped the election, three times!, of Donald Trump would do.

Have a great day.

Now you have both sides. (Part I is here.) Your assignment: Compare and contrast.

A Sanctuary State By Any Other Name…Will Still Smell Unethical

Democrats truly are addicted to “It isn’t what it is,” or Yoo’s Rationalization. It is this characteristic that has led them so deep into George Orwell territory and why the 21st Century mutation of the party is so untrustworthy. “War is Peace,” and an open border was a secure border, according to Biden’s Secretary of Homeland Security. “Slavery is Freedom,” and President Biden was sharp as a tack even as he descended into gibberish on national TV. And, as we all know, “Ignorance is Strength,” and Kamala Harris was the most qualified Presidential candidate ever, ran a perfect campaign, and only lost because Americans are sexists and racists.

Maura Healy, the Democratic governor of my original home state (which has always been a little bit nuts) really opted in to Yoo’s Rationalization big time this week. She submitted a radical pro-illegal immigration bill to designate schools, hospitals, churches, and courthouses as official “ICE-free zones,” which would have the effect of sharply (and I believe illegally) limiting where U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement can operate in the Bay State.

Healy’s bill would require ICE agents to obtain a judicial warrant before making civil immigration arrests in so-called “sensitive locations,” effectively placing some of the most common public spaces off-limits to routine federal enforcement. I.C.E. agents would have to obtain a judicial warrant before making civil immigration arrests in so-called “sensitive locations,” effectively placing some of the many public spaces off-limits to routine federal law enforcement. The bill would direct state agencies not to allow I.C.E. to use state-owned property for enforcement operations and restrict cooperation between local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities. And the proposed legislation does not distinguish between non-violent illegal immigration cases and criminal offenders: apparently in the Bay State, any illegal immigrant is a Good Illegal Immigrant.