Ethics Dunces

Once Again, “The View” Raises the Issue of Whether There Needs to Be a “Stupidity Rule” For Professions

/ Jack Marshall / 6 Comments

Back in 2024, I posited, only half in jest, that “The View’s” resident lawyer on the all-female idiot panel, Sunny Hostin, had made such a stupid assertion on the program that it should trigger legal ethics Rule 8.3, which mandates that a lawyer who has knowledge of another lawyer’s conduct that substantially calls into question that individual’s fitness to practice law must—must—report that unfit lawyer to bar authorities for professional discipline. Hostin had surmised that “climate change” causes earthquakes and eclipses, and stated this cretinous conclusion on national television, on an ABC News program, which is what “The View” purports to be.

I wrote in part (and in disgust):

“[S]ome people with law licenses are demonstrably too stupid to be trusted by clients. Hostin is screaming proof of the validity of this conclusion, yet there is nothing in the disciplinary rules governing the minimal ethics requirements of lawyers that mentions basic, personal intellectual competence as a mandatory component of professional, legal competence.

There should be. One would think that the challenge of graduating from law school and passing the bar exam would be sufficient to ensure that a lawyer is at least smart enough to come in out of the rain, but in extreme cases like Sunny, one would be wrong….believing that climate change causes solar eclipses is signature significance. You can’t come to such an idiotic conclusion and not be an idiot. This delusion [shows] a crippling deficit in critical thinking skills. One cannot be a trustworthy lawyer without minimal critical thinking skills. When a lawyer demonstrates such a deficit beyond a shadow of a doubt, that ought to be considered a legitimate reason for disbarment.”

Remember, professionals are special members of society whose important roles require that they be trustworthy. True professionals include the clergy, doctors, lawyers, judges, law enforcement officials, military leaders, public servants, accountants, psychiatrists, and teachers, and though it sounds absurd today, journalists. Really, really stupid people are not trustworthy, in fact it is dangerous to trust them. If they are sufficiently stupid, they should not hold any of those societal roles and positions.

Ethics Alarms, as those of you who have read the commenting rules here know, has among its provisions that the moderator, that’s me, may at his discretion ban a commenter who has demonstrated to my dissatisfaction that said commenter is too intellectually deficient to contribute substantively to the discussions. I believe that I have only had to invoke it twice.

Which brings me back to “The View”…

Pages: 1 2

The Rest of the Story: CNN’s Abbe Phillip Forced To Issue On Air Apology

/ Jack Marshall / 4 Comments

As chronicled here, CNN’s talking heads lied repeatedly in an attempt to blame the attempted terrorist bombing in New York City on anti-Muslim, right-wing bigots. First Abbe Phillip repeated the Big Lie that had already been proven false, then she deceitfully continued it with a misleading “clarification” on X, and then “The View’s” fake conservative Ana Navarro repeated the fake Axis narrative a day later. The criticism of Phillip’s lie was so loud on social media that CNN apparently told their incompetent (but black and female, so she will be hard to fire) to do an on air apology, so we got this:

Verdict: 1. Too late. 2. Not good enough. She’s still lying.

Pages: 1 2

Jesse Jackson Jr. Properly Slams Obama and Biden for Trying To Turning His Father’s Funeral Into An Anti-Trump Campaign Rally

/ Jack Marshall / 4 Comments

Well good for him.

Jackson said, during a private memorial service at Rainbow Push Coalition headquarters in Chicago, that “[Y]esterday, I listened for several hours to three United States presidents who do not know Jesse Jackson.”

He continued,

“He maintained a tense relationship with the political order, not because the presidents were white or black, but the demands of our message, the demands of speaking for the least of these — those who are disinherited, the damned, the dispossessed, the disrespected — demanded not Democratic or Republican solutions, but demanded a consistent, prophetic voice that at no point in time ever sold us out as people. And it speaks volumes about who the Rev. Jesse Jackson was.”

Kamala Harris, Barack Obama, Joe Biden all used their eulogies to attack the President and his policies, though, as you might have guessed, Harris was the most obnoxious and made the least sense. “Let me just say I predicted a lot about what’s happening right now,” Harris smirked. “I’m not into saying I told you so but we did see it coming.” I’d love to ask her what it was exactly that she “saw coming.” The forceful repudiation of the weak, zombie administration she was part of? The voters’ rejection of her embarrassing DEI candidacy? Her running mate’s utter disgrace and exposure as a corrupt hack?

Jackson’s was a subtle and measured rebuke, so subtle and measured that most of the Axis media felt it necessary to ignore it. Many, realizing how inappropriate it was for Barack Obama, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris to turn attention away from Jackson’s father and onto their hatred of Donald Trump at Jesse Jackson Sr.’s funeral, also worked to hide the Democrats’ nauseating conduct from the public…after all, there’s an election coming!

Pages: 1 2

A Quick Ethics Villains Inventory…[Link Fixed]

/ Jack Marshall / 19 Comments

A lot of unethical junk has been flying around lately, and just to keep my brain clear (and yours) I feel the need to take stock. This isn’t a complete list, of course, just one that includes miscreants whose conduct and/or character I feel need additional attention here…

Pages: 1 2

Ethics and Human Nature Observations on Ethics Mega-Dunce Jurickson Profar

/ Jack Marshall / 11 Comments

Observation #1: What an idiot!

Imagine: You are a mediocre journeyman baseball player past your prime and holding on the big league job by your fingernails. In desperation, you decide to cheat, using banned performance-enhancing drugs, risking suspension and a career of being regarded as untrustworthy by fans and future employers—and you get away with it, Not only that, but you have the best season of your career by far, make the All-Star team for the first time, and because you were playing out a one-year contract, you win a\three-year, $42 million guaranteed contract. It all worked! You have a job for three seasons, and you’re set for life. even if your arms fall off.

Then you cheat again, lose half of year one (2025) with an 80 game suspension, and cheat again, and get banned for an entire season. Total loss: 21 million dollars.

Meet Braves outfielder Jurickson Profar, possessor of one of my all-time favorite baseball names (along with Van Lingle Mungo , Urban Shocker and several others) who was just hit with his second PED offense and a 162-game ban, ESPN’s Jeff Passan reports. Now he’ll miss the entire 162-game season in 2026 and will get a lifetime ban if he gets a third positive test in the future, which, given his apparent IQ, seems plausible if not likely. Profar will not be paid his $15MM salary this season, and he will be ineligible for postseason play in 2026 if the Braves were to get into the playoffs, which his conduct has made less likely.

Profar turned 33 a couple weeks ago, so in baseball terms he is in the twilight of an undistinguished career with the exception of that single shock 2024 year where he played like he was on steroids or…oh. Right. He’s signed through the 2027 season and is owed a $15MM salary again in that disastrous (for the Braves) contract’s final year. They likely will release him as soon as Profar’s year-long ban is up. He has probably played his last game in the Major Leagues.

Observations (other than “What an idiot!”):

Pages: 1 2

Good News, Progressives, Democrats and Trump Deranged! The Washington Post Is Still Biased, Dishonest and Untrustworthy…

/ Jack Marshall / 9 Comments

“Democracy Dies in Darkness.”

What a joke.

A lot of my Trump Deranged Facebook friends flipped out in fury after owner Jeff Bezos fired much of the Washington Post staff, including many unethical, lying pundits and columnists. How dare Bezos interfere with his paper’s partisan propaganda just because it was losing money by the millions? Many of my mentally ill friends announced that they would boycott Amazon in vengeance.

I’m thrilled to be able to inform my miserable friends, relatives and colleagues that they now have a reason to buck up. The Post may be gutted, but whatever remains in the ruins is still dishonest, unethical, biased and as partisan as ever.

In a story three days ago headlined, “Outside White House, hundreds protest attack on Iran, urge end to conflict,” the Post highlighted a protest that broke out near the White House hours after “Epic Fury” began. The reports chose to explain the event though the eyes of Ermiya Fanaeian, “a 25-year-old PhD candidate in political science at Howard University” whom the Post introduced as a young woman who “has lived in the United States since she was 1, but still has family in her home country of Iran.”

As “word spread of attacks there by Israel and the U.S.,” Post reporters Jasmine Golden and Liam Scott wrote, Fanaeian “grew concerned about her relatives and other Iranians” and “decided to protest the military action.” “It hits close to home,” Fanaeian was quoted as saying. “I also know that the people in Iran are the ones who are going to experience the most, the biggest consequences from these attacks.”

Poor Ermiya! This is the news media playing the cognitive dissonance game. Let’s watch the President’s attack on an international villain and purveyor of terrorism that has been declaring “Death to America!” and planning death to Israel for decades, as filtered through the emotions of an innocent young female student worried about her family.

Pages: 1 2

Presenting The Little-Known Progeny of “Bias Makes You Stupid”: “Bias Makes You Direct Stupid Versions of ‘Inherit The Wind'”

/ Jack Marshall / 2 Comments

I’m sorry to return to the topic of theatrical casting ethics so soon after my last deep dive (here), but The Arena Stage’s new production of the Lawrence and Lee classic “Inherit the Wind” has opened in Washington D.C., where that company is revered beyond all others. It is a travesty, theatrically and historically, and especially directorally, since the director, Ryan Guzzo Purcell, has apparently done no research into the history behind the drama or, in the alternative, has decided that virtue signalling and DEI sensibilities are more important than fairness to the authors and an unquestioned American classic.

I suppose, he could be just plain nuts.

“This classic courtroom drama, inspired by the 1925 Scopes “Monkey” Trial, explores profound themes of intellectual freedom, religious conviction, and scientific discovery. Witness the gripping narrative unfold in the nation’s capital,” the Arena says on its website. Right. That’s what the play is supposed to be about. It also is a fictionalized version of a famous historical event involving three famous and important American figures: Clarence Darrow, generally believed to be the greatest trial lawyer this nation ever produced (I know a little bit about him), William Jennings Bryan, the famous orator, statesman, and three-time loser as the Democratic nominee for President, and H.L. Mencken, the brilliant, acerbic, misanthropic writer who covered the trial for the Baltimore Sun. Lawrence and Lee, the playwrights, ethically decided that rather than falsely represent real historical figures whose words and characters they might need to manipulate for dramatic purpose, made it clear who their characters were based on and gave them suggestive but different names so there would be no confusing the fiction with fact. (I say “ethically” to contrast their conduct with the writers of “Death by Lightning”). Thus Darrow became “Henry Drummond,” Bryan became “Matthew Harrison Brady,” H.L became “E.K. Hornbeck” and Scopes became “Bertram Cates.” Nonetheless, the historical connection to the real figures is central to the show.

But not to the Arena Stage. The actor playing Bryan/Brady is made to resemble Colonel Sanders for some reason, in a Kentucky Fried Chicken goatee and a white plantation suit. Bryan was famously a Mid-Westerner, so this appearance is jarring, especially since the play has a long running bit about the court calling Bryan/Brady by the honorific title,”Colonel.” This choice is approximately as disorienting as casting a character based on Abe Lincoln with a jockey. Knowing that Brady is Bryan is important: a major speech by Brady’s wife laments the pain the character suffered from being defeated in three runs for the White House. Bryan is the only man since 1844 to run for the office three times. In the classic movie version of the play, Frederick March played Brady taking pains to evoke Bryan’s speaking style, his posture, expressions and body language. His performance was finger-lickin’ good.

Pages: 1 2

Today’s Lesson In The Ethical Deterioration Of Congress: Rep. Mace and Omar’s Insult-Fest…

/ Jack Marshall / 14 Comments

I would put up “The Country’s in the Very Best of Hands” again (from the excellent musical “Li’l Abner,” which probably will never be produced anywhere ever again), but even I’m getting sick of it, it’s been appropriate so often lately. Thus this time I’m only posting images of the two latest examples of what terrible role models and representatives we have in Congress, Rep. Omar and Rep. Mace.

After President Donald Trump announced the death of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei following U.S.-Israeli strikes on the country, Mace posted a Fox News graphic of Khamenei with the legend, “Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei Confirmed Dead.” She added “My heart goes out to Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib tonight. Sending them thoughts and prayers.”

Omar, whose instincts for dignified comportment were on vivid display last week at the State of the Union affair, responded, “I hope you aren’t drunk and took your staff’s advice. Rashida and I don’t know this man and feel confident he didn’t care about us. Please restrain from drinking too much as you have been warned from your staff and stay off social media when you are drunk. I pray in his holy month you find peace and respect for your self.”

Mace, who denies accusations that she has a drinking problem, tweeted back, “So tell me, what was it like being married to your brother?” Later Mace wrote, “Ilhan Omar didn’t care that over 1,000 Jews were slaughtered on a Jewish holiday. Maybe sit this one out terrorist lover.”

To her credit, Omar did not respond, “OK, Nazi bitch! You want a piece of me? Bring it on! After I whip your flabby ass, you’ll be the one wearing a burka!”

Well.

Pages: 1 2

“Shrinkflation” Ethics: Ritz Crackers

/ Jack Marshall / 19 Comments

For some reason, a grocery store sale led me to purchase an absurd number of Ritz cracker boxes in late 2023. Those crackers lasted until just a few weeks ago, so I only had to buy another box last week. I knew immediately that the new box was smaller and lighter than the ones I had been staring at for over two years.

Sure enough, Nabisco replaced cracker packs with smaller packs in 2024 resulting in about 30% fewer crackers by weight while keeping the same price. But that’s not what most annoyed me. The crackers themselves are noticeably smaller, and also thinner. I’ve been eating Ritz crackers, the favored crackers in the Marshall family, most of my life. I knew their size like I know my nose. I can’t find a good photo that demonstrates the difference, but it is dramatic.

That means, of course, that the “ORIGINAL” label on the front of the box is a lie, and false advertising. The weight is on the box as required, and if an alert consumer is paying attention, he or she knows that the price is the same for fewer crackers. But there is no way the smaller Ritz can accurately be called the “original” version.

Who knows what other hidden surprises will be in store for cracker aficionados in the years ahead?

This was my last purchase of Ritz crackers.

Ethics Quiz: No Applause, No Applause, No Applause!

/ Jack Marshall / 9 Comments

Hmmmm…

In Tacoma Park, one of the most woke and wonderful communities in already insufferably progressive Maryland, Mayor Talisha Searcy ordered the crowd at a recent city council meeting not to applaud the various statements made by citizens as the council sought comments on a study regarding the city’s rent stabilization laws.

“I just want to make sure I’m learning about how to facilitate civility within a community,” the mayor said as she ordered the audience to “refrain from cheering, booing, signs, all that good stuff” as well as applauding. Many in the crowd were not pleased. When a spectator shouted that prohibiting clapping is “undemocratic,” the mayor delivered the stunning theory that “clapping for some and not all is not democratic” and that “we have to allow for people to feel safe to say what they feel.”

Okay, she’s an idiot, an ethics dunce, an expired hippie, and the most obnoxious species of progressive squish. These are the kinds of people,who demand that nobody at a meeting ever condemn even the most brain-dead idea because it might hurt the feelings of the dim bulb who offered it. Searcy is the kind of person who loves the passive-aggressive “I hear you” that usually means, “but I’m going to forget you ever said anything so stupid.”

There is no defending her claim that “clapping for some and not all” is undemocratic. However, I am interested in whether it is ever ethical to ban positive reactions, politely expressed.

Pages: 1 2