Boy, have I gotten a lot of grief for never capitulating to the thought-control demand that the contagion responsible for the pandemic, the lockdown, my business losing 45% of its income for two years (and counting), my sister wearing a mask in her car, seven-inning baseball games, an untrustworthy 2020 election and more be called the anodyne name “Covid 19,” or just “Covid” to its mask-obsessed friends. Here at Ethics Alarms, it is the Wuhan virus and always has been, because it was obvious from the start that China’s province is where this disaster (and its equally disastrous cover-up) started, but as usual of late, the mainstream media and progressives decided to use the adoption of a fair and informative name that ensures permanent responsibility, if not accountability, for millions of deaths and the savaging of the US economy for its favorite hobby of race-baiting. Yes, once again, the truth was racist, and censorship necessary because assholes incapable of rational thought would abuse facts to justify beating up and terrorizing anyone who looked Asian.
Government & Politics
OH NOOOO! Gallup Says Facism Is On The Rise In The US!!
Well, that may be a bit over-stated, though not in the parlance of the Democratic Party and its propaganda agents in the news media. What Gallup really found, in its annual survey of U.S. values and beliefs, is that social conservatism is on the rise, and has reached its highest level in a decade, since 2012. Gee…what…a…surprise…
Gallup, being, as much as it tries to fight it, also infected with partisan bias, doubletalks its explanation for charts like these:
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:
Update: More Ethics Observations On The Trump Indictment [Expanded]
For the record, I am royally sick of this topic already, and it’s just starting, with more than a year to go. I’m sick of Trump, I’m sick of the Democrats’ “destroy the village to save it” obsession with stopping Trump without just winning elections fairly and squarely, and I’m sick of the hypocrisy on all sides, and I’m really sick of reading obnoxious comments in moderation from single-minded ignoramuses who won’t even try to examine all sides of a complex issue, probably because they aren’t capable of it.
Sure, I’ll double down. I wrote on Friday that the decision to indict Trump was wildly irresponsible (if you didn’t discern that from my comparison to cloning dinosaurs, maybe you need to find another blog to hang out at) and was a utilitarian botch of existential proportions, and the tsunami is already developing, as that tweet above from a generally perceptive conservative Twitter wag indicates. Also predictably, gloating Democrats are tossing more of the afore-mentioned jet fuel on the fire, like this asshole:
Yecchhh. But let’s dig in…
1. The last post on this matter has surpassed the number of comments that allow normal people to read them all, so I’ll be overlapping a bit. For example, Alan Dershowitz also framed the indictment as I did, writing in Newsweek that it was “The Most Dangerous Indictment in History,” and saying in part,
This moment portends a massive change in the norms of this nation that all Americans who care about the neutral rule of law should pay close attention to, for it raises the specter of the partisan weaponization of the criminal justice system—not just by the Democrats targeting Trump but by Republicans who will certainly retaliate when they regain control of the criminal charging process.
That is how a large proportion of the public will regard it, and the evidence is irrelevant. Dershowitz also reminded me of Big Lie #6, “Trump’s Defiance Of Norms Is A Threat To Democracy.”
Remember? Democrats are hoping you won’t, but throughout the Trump Presidency, the accusation from the “resistance”/Democratic Party/mainstream media alliance (The Axis of Unethical Conduct) was that Trump was undermining democracy by not following unwritten “norms”—you know, like not using impeachment as a partisan tactic, not attempting to de-legitimatize the President, his election, and the Supreme Court, not weaponizing a health emergency to justify loosening election integrity measures, not intentionally violating the Constitution with Executive Orders like the one requiring Federal workers to be vaccinated, not giving a national speech declaring anyone who opposes his policies of being fascists and dangers to democracy…wait, I’m sorry! Those were some of the norms Democrats chose to defy; I get confused sometimes. My point is that the hypocrisy is staggering. There is a reason no former President or current major Presidential constender has ever been arrested or indicted by the rival party: it reeks of Third World dictatorships, and almost guarantees dangerous national division. This is why Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon.
From China, An “It Isn’t What It Is” For the Ages: “Rat Head Gate”
“War Is Peace. Freedom Is Slavery. Ignorance Is Strength.” The frighteningly Orwellian progressive movement and its Democratic Party facilitators have emulated Big Brother in their conviction that if you repeat an obvious lie often enough (and the news media helps out by at least looking the other way), enough lazy, careless citizens will accept whatever you say. Thus biological men have no advantage over women in athletic contests, the Southern border is secure, the economy is great, hiring people because of their color isn’t racial discrimination and a fetus isn’t a human life. On the Ethics Alarms Rationalization List, this is #64. Yoo’s Rationalization or “It isn’t what it is,” named after the Bush Administration lawyer who explained that waterboarding wasn’t torture. Totalitarian regimes depend on #64, which is why its emergence as a Democratic Party staple is especially ominous.
China, speaking of totalitarian regimes, has developed a culture in which “It isn’t what it is” has become the proverbial hammer for authorities who see every controversy as a nail. At the cafeteria of the Jiangxi Vocational Technical College of Industry Trade in Nanchang, China, a student found a desiccated rat’s head in his bowl of rice and memorialized the unordered meal item on his cell phone. When he confronted the cafeteria staff, however, he was assured that it wasn’t a rat’s head, but a duck’s neck. (That’s apparently considered just yummy in China. They even charged the student extra. I’m kidding…)
I’d include a photo, but it’s too disgusting; trust me, the head belonged to a rat. It has fur, it has little rat teeth. The nauseated student’s video quickly spread on Chinese social media, but the school stuck to its duck head story, because “It isn’t what it is” only works if you repeat your lie with gusto, and forever. Last week, the Jiangxi Vocational Technical College put out an official statement that the thing was duck, not rat, and the local food supervision bureau also confirmed that it was a duck neck. School officials warned students not to discuss the incident online anymore, or they would face serious consequences.
Ethics Dunce: Gov. Ron DeSantis
Yecchh.
This hacky, dishonest attack ad undermines the one major advantage Gov. DeSantis should have over Donald Trump in their approaching battle for the GOP nomination: DeSantis doesn’t behave like he’s 10 years old. Allowing this photo to appear in the ad is particularly irresponsible…
…as it is a bad fake. If a candidate will allow fake photos to be used to mislead the public, what else will he lie about? This one is particularly stupid, because it shouldn’t be hard to legitimately criticize Donald Trump on myriad issues; creating false images to trigger junior high “Ew!” reactions is wildly unprofessional. Why is DeSantis relying on people who think this is legitimate advocacy?
As Disney Supporters Complain About Censorship, Disney Engages In Artistic Censorship And WrongThink Control
Doyle: You dumb guinea.
Cloudy: How the hell did I know he had a knife?
Doyle: Never trust a nigger.
Cloudy: He coulda been white!
Doyle: Never trust anyone.That exchange has been excised from the versions of the film used on Turner Classic Movies, iTunes and Criterion. The film’s distributor, 20th Century Fox, was acquired by Disney before the scene disappeared. It is artistic censorship, straight up; no more acceptable than painting over the breasts Reubens paintings, or bleeping out “damn” is Rhett Butler’s famous kiss-off to Scarlet (as was done regularly when the movie began being shown on network television.)
Again, we are faced with deciding whether the motives here were stupid or sinister. I probably vote for both. The accelerating effort to declare the word “nigger” as taboo regardless of intent, use or context is pure attempted mind-control and Orwellian WrongThink totalitarianism—now embraced, as in other totalitarian tactics, by most of the Left and the Democratic Party. It is also unprincipled pandering to Critical Race Theory extremism. The rational mind boggles at what canonical works of art and literature face permanent scarring if the practice is allowed to take hold. Just off the top of my recently repaired head, I can think of several superb films that include “nigger” in the dialogue, like “The Shining,” “In the Heat of the Night,” “To Kill a Mockingbird,” “Mississippi Burning,” “Pulp Fiction,” and of course, “Blazing Saddles.”
Early in William Friedkin’s classic film “The French Connection,” Jimmy “Popeye” Doyle (Gene Hackman) argues with his partner, Buddy “Cloudy” Russo (Roy Scheider) regarding Russo recently sustaining a knife wound in a confrontation with a black drug-dealer:
Doyle: You dumb guinea.
Cloudy: How the hell did I know he had a knife?
Doyle: Never trust a nigger.
Cloudy: He coulda been white!
Doyle: Never trust anyone.That exchange has been excised from the versions of the film used on Turner Classic Movies, iTunes and Criterion. The film’s distributor, 20th Century Fox, was acquired by Disney before the scene disappeared. It is artistic censorship, straight up; no more acceptable than painting over the breasts Reubens paintings, or bleeping out “damn” is Rhett Butler’s famous kiss-off to Scarlet (as was done regularly when the movie began being shown on network television.)
Again, we are faced with deciding whether the motives here were stupid or sinister. I probably vote for both. The accelerating effort to declare the word “nigger” as taboo regardless of intent, use or context is pure attempted mind-control and Orwellian WrongThink totalitarianism—now embraced, as in other totalitarian tactics, by most of the Left and the Democratic Party. It is also unprincipled pandering to Critical Race Theory extremism. The rational mind boggles at what canonical works of art and literature face permanent scarring if the practice is allowed to take hold. Just off the top of my recently repaired head, I can think of several superb films that include “nigger” in the dialogue, like “The Shining,” “In the Heat of the Night,” “To Kill a Mockingbird,” “Mississippi Burning,” “Pulp Fiction,” and of course, “Blazing Saddles.”
On Senator Hawley’s Unethical Questioning Of Judge Loren AliKhan
I hate this stuff; I condemn it frequently in my legal ethics seminars as a sign of the public’s ignorance regarding the function of lawyers, and when practiced by political parties and the news media, it is particularly disgusting. And here comes supposed GOP star, Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo), to pull this despicable stunt in a hearing on the qualifications of Judge Loren AliKhan, nominated for a federal district court judgeship by President Biden.
Hawley’s “gotcha!” employed to discredit AliKhan was that in 2020, when she served as Washington, D.C. Solicitor General, she defended the city in court after the Capitol Hill Baptist Church sued D.C. Mayor Bowser for religious discrimination. Bowser (who, as I’ve already mentioned once today, is one of the worst major city mayors) shut down church events to protect public health during the pandemic freak-out, but encouraged and allowed mass Black Lives Matter protests. A federal judge ruled in Capitol Hill Baptist’s favor, and the city did not appeal because as almost everyone with any legal literacy knew at the outset that Bowser’s double standard was pretty much indefensible.
Observations On Washington Nationals “Pride Night”
That’s a photo from last night’s Pride celebration at Nationals Park in Washington, D.C., as Nancy Pelosi threw the ceremonial first pitch. Many conservative wags are enjoying themselves, like “Not the Bee,” which mocked, “The Washington National’s baseball team hosted a Pride Night …of course, they had some buffoonish drag queen show up to toss the first pitch. Oh, wait- I’m being told it’s Nancy Pelosi…Fives of people applauded wildly…”
Observations:
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.












