Ethics Villain and Unethical Quote of the Month: Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker (Guess What Party…)

Yet more smoking gun evidence that the Democratic Party of the 21st Century does not want or support democracy. We shouldn’t need any more proof after the horrors of 2024, but an amazing number of Americans with misty-eyed memories of JFK, “The Great Society,” and even Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama (the fools!) refuse to accept what the party of Jefferson, Jackson, Truman and FDR has metastasized into.

Pritzker was one of the primary state dictators during the stupid pandemic response, signing 41 consecutive emergency orders during the Wuhan virus freakout to give himself unlimited powers so he could keep businesses and schools closed. His whole family is a menace: his sister is the woke empress that had Harvard select the DEI plagiarist Claudine Gay to lead Harvard further down the path to intellectual corruption.

President Trump is doing no more (and amazingly, not much less) than what he promised Americans when he was the only choice voter were given to avoid a DEI fraud claiming perfection for the most incompetent President in U.S. history. The hysterical and hypocritical Left is screaming “Dictatorship!” when the elected President is using his powers appropriately and necessarily to address the looming debt crisis, enforce the law, protect commerce, and remove the metaphorical termites from the foundations of democracy and its institutions like universities, law firms, and journalism.

And just listen to those morons cheering for this jerk! It has been speculated that Pritzker’s insurrection act (his party’s prosecutors and pundits have taken the position that telling a crown to “fight” is a call for violence, remember) is a prelude to his entering the 2028 wide-open race for President among his party’s current group of boobs, totalitarians and losers. Yeah, good luck with that, J.B…

And no, I’m not making fun of the Guv’s weight, I’m making fun of the fact that he’s deluded. In fact, conservative writers and pundits are behaving unethically by taking the low road and issuing cheap shots based on Pritzker’s girth. Here’s Powerline, for example: “The underlying message of Pritzker’s call for ‘disruption’ is that he is running for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination. Heavy!”

It’s this man’s brain, not his belly, that’s the problem. Try to stay focused.

Unethical Quote of the Month, or “People Really Want to Vote For Someone Like This To Be President?”

Yes, it’s Michelle Obama. Here’s the insufferable quote “explaining” her boycotting of the Trump inauguration, pointer to Ann Althouse, who pays attention to podcasts by celebrities like Mrs. Barack (me, I have sock drawers to keep):

“So I’m at this stage in life where I have to define my life on my terms for the first time. So what are those terms? And going to therapy just to work all that out. Like, what happened that 8 years that we were in the, the White House? What did that do to me — internally, my soul?… And going through therapy, you know, is… unlearning some of those messages that I’ve been tell… saying to myself and then trying to actively practice something different to rewire those neurons in my head…. [M]y decision to skip the inauguration… people couldn’t believe that I was saying no for any other reason — they had to assume, that my marriage was falling apart. You know, it’s like while I’m here really trying to own my life and intentionally practice making the choice that was right for me, and it took everything in my power to not do the thing that was right or that was, was that that was perceived as right but do the thing that was right for me. That was a hard thing for me to do. I had to basically trick myself out of it. And it started with not having anything to wear. I mean, I had affirmatively — because I’m always prepared for any funeral, anything I have. I walk around with the right dress, I travel with clothes, just in case something pops off. So I was like, if I’m not going to do this thing, I gotta tell my team: I don’t even want to have a dress ready. Because it’s so easy to just say, let me do the right thing.”

Right…huh?

What an insufferable, narcissistic, arrested adolescent bore. She had the privilege of living in the White House and having the unearned status and honor of being treated as a national figure and icon, despite no personal achievements that warranted such celebrity other than marrying the right guy. As a former First Lady, Michelle has few obligations, but one of them is to provide a unifying example by appearing in a non-partisan role at certain traditional ceremonies and functions, a President’s inauguration being an obvious one. She has parlayed her White House stay into untold riches, and the very least she could do to earn her keep is to show up (which, as Woody Allen has pointed out, is 80% of success in life). Instead we get this New Agey empty “like” blather.

Funniest Unethical Quote of the Week: The New York Post

“The precise reason that Biden is struggling to find top-dollar audiences is unclear.”

—The New York Post, in a report on the former President’s attempt to bill $300,000 per speaking appearance.

The “precise reason” is incredibly clear! Not only that, but the Post’s story is clear about what that reason is. For example, this passage: “Biden’s use of “colored” to refer to black people while speaking at a disability conference in Chicago earlier this week has some former aides hoping he will spend more time at his Rehoboth Beach house. ‘This was hard to watch,’ said one former White House official. ‘It felt like seeing someone you care about start to regress. We just wanted him to enjoy retirement like other presidents — not go out like this.'”

The man is suffering from progressive dementia, and has been for years. He was never especially bright to begin with. Biden has little or no influence now, and was an embarrassment as President. Decision-makers for any organization that paid $300,000 for Biden to stumble through a speech written by someone else would be liable for breach of fiduciary duties.

I suppose having him speak might be a draw for the same kinds of people who watched poor Anna Nicole Smith’s reality show, as the late obese and alcoholic model/actress/gold-digger stumbled through each episode, slurring her words and looking ridiculous. It was kind of like watching a geek bite the heads off of live chickens at a carnival: witnessing complate human degradation makes som feel better about themselves. But no carnival paid geeks a $300,000 salary.

I was trying to think of a former President of the United States whom I wouldn’t rather hear speak than Joe Biden. There isn’t any. How could there be? Yeah, it’s a real mystery why Joe’s agents are having trouble finding suckers willing to pay $300,000, plus expenses, for the privilege of assessing how far his dementia has progressed.

Unethical Quote of the Week: Ethics Villain Taylor Lorenz

“You’re going to see women especially that feel like, Oh my God, right? Like, here’s this man who’s revolutionary, who’s famous, who’s handsome, who is young, who’s smart. He’s a person that seems like this morally good man, which is hard to find.”

—–The infamous Ethics Villain Taylor Lorenz, on CNN yesterday, saying (again) how admirable cold-blooded murderer Luigi Mangione is for killing  UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson by shooting him in the back.

Ethics Alarms has paid little attention to the unethical rantings of Lorenz, who was fired from the New York Times for publishing slanderous material, hired by the Washington Pots (which has no ethical standards), and now is on her own. The Times once described her as a “talented journalist,” which also tells you all you need to know about The Times. I have put Lorenz in the same metaphorical isolation cell with perpetually unethical pundits like Elie Mystal, Jot Reid and Jimmy Kimmel, “Julie Principle” cases so obviously devoid of decency that 1) they aren’t worth criticizing and 2) they serve as useful markers of a friend’s lack of standards: if he or she can listen to or read what these awful people spew into public discourse without thinking, “Wow, what a lunatic!” said friend is beyond ethics rehab efforts.

Continue reading

Ethics Quote of the Day: Mrs. Q

“I think I have figured out the new virtue signal of the progressive left. A conversation in the early stages begins with, “in these dark times” or “because things are so bad right now.” What this really means is, “I hate Trump, and I am letting you know that without directly saying it.” It’s almost a test it seems. What are some graceful yet pointed responses to such behavior?”

—-Star Ethics Alarms commenter Mrs. Q, in last Friday’s Open Forum

Mrs. Q’s free-standing comment was prescient, because I had been preparing to post about New York Times’ periodic progressive opinion writer Frank Bruni’s obnoxious “What Do You Tell a College Student Graduating Into This America?” [Gift link!] in his subscriber-only newsletter. Bruni, who has carved out a niche for himself at the Times because he is fat and gay, has been flummoxed (he says) when seniors visit him in his faculty office at Duke (he teaches writing) and ask, as a recent Duke co-ed did, her eyes “red” and “watery,” “Where do you find hope?”

If he were not the most knee-jerk of knee-jerk progressives and crippled by Trump Derangement, he could have answered, “Oh, grow the hell up! You can find hope everywhere, and more here in the good ol’ U.S.A. than just about anywhere else.”

Not Bruni. The piece is a great example of how an essay that is mostly biased foolishness can be enlightening, indeed often more enlightening than opinion pieces that are spot on. For example, Bruni begins by writing, “[M]y students have the privilege of attending one of the country’s most selective and affluent universities and that simply getting a college degree, any college degree, gives them a big advantage.” Yes, it’s a big advantage that graduates from Duke and other leftist indoctrination factories do not deserve, as the weepy senior’s question demonstrates. Leaving the womb of academia for real life in a nation you have been taught has been unrelentingly racist, unjust and evil since 1690 is certain to feel hopeless.

More from Bruni…

Continue reading

Unethical Quote of the Week: Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY)

“This is the political weaponization of the DOJ. Trump uses his official authority to defend his benefactor Elon Musk. The FBI then creates a task force to use our law enforcement to ‘crack down’ on adversaries of Musk’s. Where are the Republicans so opposed to ‘lawfare’?”

—Rep. Daniel Goldman (D-NY), mounting his challenge to be the most irresponsible and dishonest hack in Congress.

Just when I think I’ve figured out who the most disgracefully unethical member of Congress is after the merciful departures of George Santos, Cori Bush and Jamaal Bowman, another contender says “Hold my beer!”

I thought the current run-away champ was shaping up to be potty-mouthed, jive-talking Rep. Jasmine Crockett, who padded her lead yesterday during the House Oversight Committee’s Subcommittee on Delivering on Government Efficiency hearing titled “Anti-American Airwaves: Holding the heads of NPR and PBS Accountable. ” Demonstrating once again that she either doesn’t understand the Constitution or wants to make sure the public doesn’t understand it, she said in one of her characteristic rants, “To be clear, free speech is not about whatever it is that y’all want somebody to say, and the idea that you want to shut down everybody that is not Fox News is bullshit. We need to stop playing, because that’s what you all are doing here, you don’t want to hear the opinions of anybody else,” Crockett said.

I don’t understand why someone, maybe even a Democrat with some self-respect and integrity, didn’t have the sense or guts to point out to this demagogue that the First Amendment doesn’t require the government to subsidize political speech, only to avoid restricting it. PBS and NPR will be free to be as biased, partisan and dishonest as they please, but someone other than taxpayers should pay for it. Goldman’s idiocy, however, was even more flagrant. Let me turn the metaphorical mic over to Professor Turley, who already has neatly described what Goldman is doing:

Continue reading

EA Ends Ann Althouse’s Suspension With An Ethics Quote of the Week!

A little more than a month ago, Ethics Alarms put Ann Althouse’s quirky but frequently provocative blog on suspension as a source here for engaging excessively in her trademark “fiercely” detached commentary (‘Yes, what X did was insidious and undermines national comity but what really interests me in the word he misused…’)to an obnoxious degree. I now return her to good standing by recognizing the last sentence in a post about how Democrats are blaming the Bidens’ for their current ill fortunes as an Ethics Alarms Ethics Quote of the Week, to wit:

“The Democratic Party has itself to blame for forcing Biden on the country in 2020 and for everything that happened down the line.”

Bingo!

Truer words could not be spoken. Since its November defeat, the party has attempted to blame everyone and everything but its own series of atrocious policies, totalitarian tactics, undemocratic cover-ups, spectacular dishonesty and incompetent decisions. Biden, as has become increasingly apparent as the truth is slowly uncovered regarding just how far from being in charge during his White House tenure Joe really was, is one of the least blameworthy. He didn’t nominate himself, after all, nor was he likely fully aware of how disabled he really was becoming as his four years dragged on. Biden was never seriously regarded as Presidential material when he had all of his marbles, but his Machiavellian party nominated him to run in 2020 anyway, not because there was a chance in the world that he would be an effective President, but because he was the most likely candidate to beat Trump, especially when a pandemic made it possible for Joe’s diminishing abilities to be hidden.

True, Biden chose the ridiculous Kamala Harris as his DEI VP, but again, Democrats didn’t have to nominate her as their 2024 Presidential candidate, just as the party didn’t have to become shills for open borders, out-of-control debt, race-based hiring, crippled law enforcement, social media censorship, politicized law enforcement, transmania and climate change hysteria.

Continue reading

Ethics Quote of the Day: Prof. Jonathan Turley

“If you view conservatives judges and justices as “lawless,” then every decision that they issue can be construed as a “crisis” in failing to adopt your own interpretive approach.”

—George Washington University law professor and lawyer Jonathan Turley

I decided to ignore the recent open letter signed by approximately 950 law professors declaring the second Trump administration a “Constitutional crisis,” because it was so obviously a mass exhibition of both “bias makes you stupid” and the overwhelming partisan slant of the legal profession, upon which Ethics Alarms has commented many times. The letter is the equivalent of the infamous one in 2020 signed by all those national intelligence experts who wanted everyone to know that the Hunter Biden laptop was really Russian disinformation, but the current letter is worse. Lawyers, as professionals, are required to be trustworthy. Trustworthy lawyers don’t put their names on legal misinformation and political propaganda like this latest “Trump is a dictator” attack. (The American Bar Association has issued a similar statement.)

I’m glad I waited and let Professor Turley eviscerate these disgraces to the law and academia. Cruelly, he has more influence, visibility and credibility than little ol’ me. In his blog post and column for The Hill titled “Panic politics: Law professors’ umpteenth ‘constitutional crisis’ falls flat”, Turley neatly points out,

  • “The latest letter follows a familiar pattern that has played out like a political perpetual motion machine since the first Trump impeachment. It works something like this: A legal academy composed of largely liberal academics announces a “constitutional crisis” caused by conservatives, and then a largely liberal media runs the story with little scrutiny or skepticism. On most echo-chambered media sites, the public rarely hears an opposing view.”

Nah, there’s no mainstream media bias! On my Facebook page, lawyers and even a couple of professors regularly proclaim as fact that President Trump is “defying” the Constitution.

Biased, ignorant and Trump-Deranged is no way to practice law, son.

Read the whole thing, but here are some more excerpts: Continue reading

Ethics Quote of the Year (So Far): Donald Sensing

“Finally, hating Trump is merely cheap virtue signaling. It is neither a method nor a plan. But if you feel better about hating Trump than you feel bad about Ukrainians getting killed with no end in sight, then you are morally bankrupt and God forbid you have any say in what happens.”

—-Military expert, commentator and Methodist minister Daniel Sensing concluding his blog post, ‘I stand with Ukraine’ means what, exactly?”

Last night, probably the smartest and most reliably reasonable of my Trump-Deranged lawyer friends published a much-loved diatribe on Facebook condemning President Trump for the Oval Office meltdown with Zelenskyy last week. He doesn’t post often, but every one recently has been to take issue with a Trump, quote, policy or action. I’ve had to wrestle my metaphorical tongue to the floor every time. It would do no good to rebut him, and all my effort would do would diminish the respect he has for me because, on this topic, his powers of reasoning are gone. If I wanted to start a stampede of unfriending on my Facebook page, I would point him to the superb post by Donald Sensing flagged this morning on Instapundit by Prof. Glenn Reynolds. My friend would never see the post otherwise, since Reynolds’ legendary blog is relentlessly conservative and my friend would sooner draw a pentagram on his kitchen floor than sample anything written there. But Sensing, whose fascinating CV is here and who is better qualified to opine on the Ukraine-Russian conflict than either of us, has provided a superb analysis with clarity and logical force.

Continue reading

Ethics Alarms Generally Ignores Michael Moore But a Quote This Unethical and Cretinous Warrants an Exception…

“Who’s really being removed by ICE tonight? The child who would’ve discovered the cure for cancer in 2046? The 9th grade nerd who would’ve stopped that asteroid that’s gonna hit us in 2032? Do we care?”

Yes, activist communist and has-been documentary-maker Michael Moore really and truly made that head-explodingly stupid argument, my candidate for the most ridiculous rationalization for allowing illegal immigrants into the U.S. yet, even topping the “But that poem on the Statue of Liberty!” excuse.

It is so stupid that the theory would be a valuable diagnostic tool on IQ tests. If someone checks the “Sounds good to me!” box, that test-taker’s cognitive ability should automatically be judged as “dangerously impaired.”

As we have explained here many times, consequentialism is the ethical theory for dolts, the concept that a decision or action is right or wrong depending on what happens as a result of it. Moore is saying that an action is unethical or wrong if anything good might have happen if a different choice had be made. I hesitate to give this walking, talking ethics corrupter credit, but he just has to be smarter than to believe that. As usual, Moore is trying to con the dimmer members of the public, a large contingent among Americans who still pay attention to him.

One wag on social media responded to Moore’s insulting question with “Now do abortion.”

Bingo.