Ethics Quote Of The Month: John W. Jenkins

“The University defends the truth,” says the Harvard logo. ‘The emblem shows respect for science, using only verified facts within the University’s walls and a willingness to defend the truth.’ Yet as it relates to climate change, the University has set aside obvious truths and brought together its five professional schools supporting the new “Save the Planet” religious dogma of the past decade.”

—Harvard M.B.A John W. Jenkins, in a letter to the alumni magazine protesting the University’s complicity in promoting “imprudent policies perpetuated on our populations by Green environmental activists whose view of history is only 20 years deep.”

Jenkins, whom I have thus far not succeeded in contacting, has authored one of the clearest and most persuasive debunking of current climatic change cant, and perfectly chastised our mutual alma mater, Harvard, for its cowardly and irresponsible alliance with an unethical and destructive movement. The author appears to be in his late eighties, and more skilled in communication than graduates half, indeed a quarter his age.

Harvard Magazine published his letter, but I am trying hard to believe it was a coincidence that its second half was difficult to locate due to a pagination error. I hope Mr. Jenkins does not mind Ethics Alarms re-publishing his entire statement. It deserves to be seen by as many people as possible. The whole thing is an Ethics Quote of the Month. Here it is:

Continue reading →

Unethical Quote Of The Month (And Incompetent Elected Official): Vice-President Kamala Harris

“How dare they?”

—Vice-President Kamala Harris on June 24 referring to the U.S. Supreme Court on the anniversary of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Org. ruling that finally overturned Roe v. Wade.

This wasn’t the usual infantile babbling that characterizes most of Harris’s public appearances: Ethics Alarms has pledged to skip most of those in fealty to the Julie Principle. That quote is far worse, more significant and sinister. It’s so unethical and outrageous that I initially didn’t believe she could have been referring to the Supreme Court: most of the mainstream media accounts and even the edited videos left out the context of that outburst, so, giving the Vice-President of the United States the benefit of the doubt and assuming that surely, surely, she could not be framing a duly rendered majority ruling on the U.S. Constitution by the independent branch of the government charged with that duty by the Founders in such an ignorant, misleading and inflammatory manner.

She was, however. In fact, she had made the same fatuous, irresponsible and obnoxious statement before, a year ago, and is apparently so proud of her demagoguery that she deemed it worthy of an encore. I thought, and hoped, that her “How dare they?” was at least in the context she placed it in this past January, but no. (That is also an unethical and despicable bit of demogoguery, notable for Harris’s characterization of the famous statement in Thomas Jefferson’s masterpiece as “A promise we made in the Declaration of Independence that we are each endowed with the right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” Huh. Sounds funny. Isn’t there something missing there? Something that unborn Americans might think is important? I’m sure I’ll think of it in a minute…

But no. I could find no news report that placed this “How dare they?” in the context Harris placed it last week, but a video I can’t embed, available here on the Washington Post website, makes it clear.

In order to make such a dangerous statement, Harris has to also mislead the public into believing that, as she falsely said in January and periodically since, the United States Supreme Court “took away… a fundamental right, a basic freedom from the people of America.” Whatever one thinks should be the law or laws regarding abortion, it was never “a fundamental right, a basic freedom.” It was a Court-made right, and the Supreme Court isn’t empowered to make rights. “Fundamental rights” are the enumerated rights in the Bill of Rights and the subsequent amendments, passed by Congress and the states, in the Constitution. Roe was a bad, political, incompetent decision that most legal scholars, even those who favor abortion, admitted was wrongly decided. (If she ever had chosen to be candid about the issue, it is likely that even the sainted Ruth Bader Ginsburg recognized this.) Roe survived for so long because a parade of Justices lacked the votes and guts to overturn it.

Continue reading →

Ethical Quote Of The Month: Elon Musk

“You are the government. They are NOT your kids.”

—Entrepreneur and Twitter savior Elon Musk, responding to the Biden Administration’s totalitarian rhetoric in its latest pander to the LGBTQ lobby.

The White House released a tweet from the Biden-Harris administration that stated, “To the LGBTQI+ Community – the Biden-Harris Administration has your back.” The video accompanying the tweet states, “these are our kids,” and “not somebody else’s kids; they’re all our kids.”

Continue reading →

Call Me A Stickler, But I Don’t Want Anyone Who Talks Like This Deciding What Is Acceptable Speech, Discourse Or Opinion…

Mark Zuckerberg, the CEO of Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, said this during an interview on the “Lex Fridman Podcast”about his discovered wisdom about the difficulty of censoring social media:

“So misinformation, I think, has been a really tricky one because there are things that are obviously false, right, or they may be factual but may not be harmful. So are you gonna censor someone for just being wrong? If there’s no kind of harm implication of what they’re doing? There’s a bunch of real issues and challenges there.  Just take some of the stuff around COVID earlier in the pandemic where there were real health implications, but there hadn’t been time to fully vet a bunch of the scientific assumptions. Unfortunately, I think a lot of the kind of establishment on that kind of waffled on a bunch of facts and asked for a bunch of things to be censored that, in retrospect, ended up being more debatable or true. And that stuff is really tough, right? It really undermines trust,”

Oh for God’s sake….Observations:

Continue reading →

Ethical Quote Of The Month: Dan Abrams

“We are supposed to be in the business of calling out the spin, not creating it…If we want the public to trust us in the news business, how can the entities themselves lie or spin their own news?”

—Lawyer, TV pundit and news host (“Nightline”) Dan Abrams, condemning NBC’s story that Chuck Todd was leaving “Meet the Press” to spend more time with his family.

Oh, bingo, Dan! And the answer to Abrams’ rhetorical question is: Given how much, often and routinely they lie, news organizations shouldn’t expect the public to trust them, yet they do, because they have no respect for the public’s intelligence and no regard for the duty of journalists in a democracy to keep citizens informed.

Continue reading →

Unethical Quote Of The Week: Daily Beast Editor Katie Baker

I was abut to ignore the petty, classist, ad hominem rant directed at Gov. Ron De Santis’s wife Casey by the editor of The Daily Beast until I got to this sentence:

“The DeSantises will never be Camelot. Jackie and JFK symbolized the opposite of vulgar pettiness—they embodied youth, energy, a commitment to moral progress in the struggle for Civil Rights, and a country fresh with idealism.”

Unbelievable. The progressive punditry establishment is so desperate to distract from the ongoing Biden Administration disaster that it is stooping to Kennedy idolatry, the very essence of the Democratic Party’s hypocrisy, cynicism and deception. Someone mentioning “moral progress” in the same sentence as “JFK” makes me throw up in my mouth, to be blunt. Jackie Kennedy was an emotionally abused wife trapped in the humiliating job of protecting a serial adulterer, harasser and quite possibly rapist. How anyone can applaud the civil verdict against Donald Trump for a still-dubious sexual assault accusation and still say (or worse, believe), “Now Jack Kennedy, there was a President we could be proud of!”

Continue reading →

Ethics Quote Of The Month: Blogger Andrew Sullivan

“If gay men and lesbians want to return to liberal politics, to protect gay children, and to win back the sane center, we are going to have to disown and distance ourselves from this nihilist extremism.”

—Legendary Blogger Andrew Sullivan, in a tortured substack critique of the current pro-trans fad and its consequences on children, gays and society.

Sullivan is tortured by a lot of things, being trapped in cognitive dissonance hell as a religious and essentially conservative pundit has been driven into the arms of Democrats by his hatred of Donald Trump and Republican opposition to gay marriage. Nonetheless, he is a smart analytical thinker who writes like an angel, and his essay “The Queers Versus The Homosexuals,” arguing that “the erasure of gay men and lesbians” is going to be the inevitable result of the current trans activism madness, is very much worth reading even in its truncated form, since the whole thing is only accessible to Andrew’s subscribers. (If I had the discretionary funds to pay for any substack essayist, Sullivan would probably be as good as anyone.)

A selection of some of his other points to ponder:

Continue reading →

Ethics Quote Of The Week: Jonathan Turley

“As [the WaPo’s Philip] Bump wrote when he was falsely accusing Barr, “it is the job of the media to tell the truth.” This would be a good time to start.”

—-Prof. Jonathan Turley in an epic defenestration of Washington Post Democratic Party propagandist Philip Bump

The Washington Post continuing to publish columnist Philip Bump’s “advocacy journalism (aka. lies) tells us as much about that once respectable paper as MSNBC continuing to provide a platform for Al Sharpton (and Joy Reid, and Chris Hayes, and Lawrence O’Donnell, and Joe Scarborough…). Bump distorts facts and sets out to disorient Post readers, which is, I was taught in journalism class, the opposite of what newspapers are supposed to do. “But he’s a pundit, not a reporter!” you protest? Fine: as the saying goes, he is entitled to his opinion, but not to his own facts.

Continue reading →

Ethics Quote Of The Week: Prof. Glenn Reynolds

“If you need counseling over being “misgendered,” you’re too mentally fragile to handle the diplomatic interests of the United States. Get another job.”

—-Conservative law professor, pundit and blogger Glenn Reynolds, making the required observation on this ridiculous story:

Because the State Department has nothing more important to spend its money on, it is “testing a new feature that will provide users with the option to include their preferred pronouns in their Global Address List profile.” Unfortunately, do to human error, the feature went live, and many State Department employees had randomly assigned pronouns added to their profiles. Men were given female pronouns and vice versa, due to what was termed a “pronoun glitch.” Emails from colleagues suddenly included random pronouns, like, “She/her/hers” and “He/Him/His” in the “from” line. As Colonel Kurtz would say…

The State Department apologized profusely to those who were “triggered, and—I’m not kidding, now—is offering free therapy to “any employee who feels hurt or upset as a result of this unfortunate mistake,” according to an internal email that went out to employees on yesterday.

Continue reading →

Unethical Quote Of The Month: President Joe Biden’s Howard University Class of 2023 Commencement Address

The Gettysburg Address it surely wasn’t. In 1863, President Lincoln concisely and brilliantly laid out a grand plan for what should unify the United States of America. Yesterday, President Biden deliberately set out to divide the nation along the racial divide already made larger by the cynical efforts and policies of the Obama administration. President Obama, however, avoided directly stoking hostility between the races except when he was speaking off the cuff, as in his irresponsible comments on the Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman Ethics Train Wreck. Biden is far more direct and open about it. His party has decided that stoking black fear of white citizens and anger toward the United States itself as a purveyor of “white supremacy” is its best strategy for keeping power—that, and hammering away at the Big Lie that the purpose of abortion restrictions is to make women second-class citizens.

After all, as the late Harry Reid would surely point out, Biden’s 2022 “Soul of the Nation” speech pushing the same theme that Republicans and conservatives are racists and terrorists “worked.” What should have been an electoral rejection of disastrous progressive policies turned into a relative victory: Democrats held control of the Senate and just barely lost the House. It was predictable that the soulless and mercenary political consultants advising the party would urge it to follow the same playbook for 2024….prime hate, anger, distrust, bias, bigotry and fear, all while accusing the opposition of being agents of …hate, anger, distrust, bias, bigotry and fear. If that course damages the nation, well, you gotta crack some eggs to make an omelette.

So thus it was that President Biden spoke in front of a Howard graduating class assembled by racial discrimination and the principles of apartheid to tell them that they, their family, their communities and their race were in increasing peril because of ‘white supremacy.” After typical Biden babble, the President kicked off another dose of race-based suspicion by saying, “When it comes to race in America, hope doesn’t travel alone. It’s shadowed by fear, by violence, and by hate.” The speech went downhill from there. Most commencement speeches are exultant in tone, cheering on a rising generation to take advantage of the open and promising road ahead of them. Not this one. Here are some quotes:

But after the election and the re-election of the first Black American President, I had hoped that the fear of violence and hate was significantly losing ground.

Of course, Obama’s election and re-election proved conclusively that racial bigotry in the U.S. had diminished spectacularly.

But in 2017, in Charlottesville, Virginia, crazed neo-Nazis with angry faces came out of the fields with — literally with torches, carrying Nazi banners from the woods and the fields chanting the same antisemitic bile heard across Europe in the ‘30s. Something that I never thought I would ever see in America. Accompanied by Klansmen and white supremacists, emerging from dark rooms and remote fields and the anonymity of the Internet, confronting decent Americans of all backgrounds standing in their way, into the bright light of day. And a young woman objecting to their presence was killed.

I wonder what hack wrote that purple prose. The demonstration, which had been granted a legal permit, was triggered by the home state of Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson beginning to airbrush the history of the United States by removing statues of heroic Confederate officers in grand Soviet fashion. Torchlight marches are not the sole genre of the Far Right; as with most political demonstrations, many groups and interests joined the march, and many traveled from far away to participate. Even so, the number of marchers was estimated in the hundreds, not thousands.  It was also a single demonstration aimed at a matter of special emotional and historical resonance at the time.

Continue reading →