Government & Politics

Ethics Quiz: The Dominatrix Congressional Candidate Principle?

/ Jack Marshall / 9 Comments

Yikes.

Courtney Casgraux, 41 (above), describes herself as an international businesswoman as she runs for a seat in the United States House of Representatives for Oregon ‘s first district. Casgraux’s campaign, launched last spring, was rocked over Labor Day weekend when her past occupation as a BDSM dominatrix was revealed via video on Reddit. Casgraux was outraged. “To shame me for something that helped create the life that I have today where I have opportunity … made me really mad. Because it felt like an attack on women, not just an attack on me,” she said.

Really? Letting the public know about the past activities of a Congressional candidate is wrong? Interesting take, Madam.

In response, Casgraux says she is “reclaiming her sexuality” though a campaign collaboration with Playboy. Sure, why not? Remember, she’s running in Oregon. Did I mention what party she belongs to? Do I need to?

On Instagram the former-dominatrix wrote,

First and foremost, I would like to thank Playboy for giving me the opportunity to express what freedom means to me and welcoming me into the Playboy family. Over the last month Playboy has not only championed me but my Congressional Campaign. I’m looking forward to utilizing my platform to educate, uplift voices and fundraise for those less fortunate. My journey with Playboy is just beginning so be on the lookout for more things to come.

Boy, I can’t wait. She continued, “Secondly, I’m reclaiming this American Flag and what it represents, and that’s FREEDOM AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.” (Actually, that’s “liberty and justice for all,” but never mind…)

Her campaign website further elaborates: “As a fiercely independent single mother who has had to navigate the adversities of life, I understand firsthand the struggles that American families face on a daily basis.” OK, she’s an Oregon Democrat: can you guess her platform without peaking? Yes, she wants to secure LGBTQ “rights and equality,” guarantee “abortion rights” nationwide, pass “comprehensive gun reform” and take “immediate action on climate change.”

Your Ethics Alarms Thanksgiving Ethics Quiz is,

Should her dominatrix past be held against her by voters?

Continue reading →

The Worst President Ever? Part 5.

/ Jack Marshall / 10 Comments

One might view posting this today, on the anniversary of President Kennedy’s assassination in Dallas, as being in questionable taste. I would argue that it is the perfect day to consider the legacy of President #35, John Fitzgerald Kennedy (1961-1963).

For JFK was saved from historical infamy by moral luck, once for certain, and maybe twice. The first was during the Cuban Missile Crisis, a culmination of blunders that could have started World War III and would have, if a less rational Soviet leader had been Kennedy’s adversary. The second was the assassination, recalling snide comments by various wags that the early deaths of Elvis and Truman Capote were “good career moves.” Kennedy’s death transformed him into an icon, frozen in youth and vitality, a brilliant leader whose death caused darkness to fall. In truth, Kennedy’s three years in office were marked by few successes and serious mistakes that outlived him, like his continuing U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War. In an era in which the news media were less inclined to keep secrets for a President, JFK might have been impeached. His obsessive adulterous escapades endangered national security: among his many conquests were a Mob moll and an Israeli spy.

Kennedy cannot be fairly judged one of the worst Presidents, however, because he filled the crucial role of President as Symbol of America and the living flag as well or batter than all but a few modern Presidents, in a small group that includes FDR, Eisenhower, Reagan, and Obama. This, plus the fact that he had less than three years to add something positive beyond the Peace Corps and the space program to his legacy, takes him out of the Worst President race.

Verdict: DISQUALIFIED.

#36, Lyndon Baines Johnson (1963-1969), also doesn’t make the cut. For all the pain and national scarring the Vietnam War inflicted, Johnson didn’t start it (or end it), and few Presidents, maybe none, would have been able to successfully negotiate the cultural A-Bomb of the Sixties.

Anyone who doubts LBJ’s effectiveness should listen to the archived phone tapes of his personal maneuvering, cajoling and threatening former Congressional associates to get his Civil Rights bill passed. For some reason historians like to say that Kennedy, if he lived, would have signed a similar law; that’s a dubious assumption. Kennedy probably wouldn’t have won in 1964 by a landslide: Nelson Rockefeller might have been the next President, and it was the Southern Democrats, Johnson’s cronies, who were the main obstacles to civil rights. You don’t have to agree, with the benefit of hindsight, with all of “The Great Society” to agree that Johnson was one of our most skilled Presidents, though a flawed and unlucky one.

Verdict: DISQUALIFIED.

Now, at last, we come to a genuine contender for Worst President Ever: Richard Milhous Nixon, #37 (1968-1974). Even he’s problematic: although he is the only President so far who would have been legitimately impeached and convicted, Nixon was, before the Watergate conspiracy, another very skilled and effective President. He was one of our smartest White House residents (but then so was Wilson), and understood the office from the start as few have. Nixon had many important policy achievements as well, and those accomplishments came in the teeth of strong opposition and bias from the news media (though nothing as extreme as Republican Presidents have faced in this century), and almost unanimous hate from an entire generation.

Continue reading →

The Cognitive Dissonance Scale And Jobs Lost After Hamas-Israel War Outbursts On Social Media

/ Jack Marshall / 4 Comments

The scenario has been a theme this week. Someone shoots off his or her metaphorical mouth showing ignorance and probable anti-Semitic bias in a social media post designed for public consumption, and loses a job when the employer decides that it doesn’t want to lose business from those who might wonder, “Why do they hire people like that?”

It is not a First Amendment issue. It is a an irresponsible employee issue. Hollywood has been especially busy. Spyglass, the company that owns the “Scream” film franchise, fired actress Melissa Barrera from the upcoming “Scream VII” (There are going to be seven of these?) after she posted standard issue “genocide/innocent Gazans/ cruel Israel messages. “THIS IS GENOCIDE & ETHNIC CLEANSING,” she concluded.

1) No, it isn’t, and 2) You really don’t understand the Cognitive Dissonance Scale, do you?

It’s really quite simple, Melissa…

For the vast majority of Americans who pay attention and aren’t intersectional fanatics, supporting the Palestinian-Hamas “From the river to the sea” mission is at the bottom of the scale. People who want to see movies must regard the films and its stars above zero, ideally quite a bit above. If that film or its stars associate themselves with a deeply negative point of view or conduct, that connection (think of being tied to an anchor) drags the positive attitudes down, meaning fewer tickets sold, and in turn fewer profits.

Continue reading →

Ethics Mystery: How Many Of These Disasters Will It Take For Progressives To Realize That Their Woke Delusions Are Just Plain Wrong?

/ Jack Marshall / 16 Comments

Case study: In 2021, Oregon became the first US state to decriminalize hard drugs like heroin, crack and fentanyl. After all, possession and sales are “victimless crimes,” right? And non-violent, too. Nobody’s hurt when family members, parents, spouses and employees become addicts except the drug-users themselves! Oregon’ brainwashed progressives overwhelmingly voted for Measure 110 in a referendum in November 2020, believing the left wing/ libertarian cant that making the possession and use of narcotics legal would make it easier to get addicts treated.

Just three years later, an Emerson poll shows that 56% of voters want to make the drugs illegal again. Why? I bet you can guess, even though the voters in Oregon couldn’t figure it out since wokeness ate their brains. The addicted are flocking to the state, requiring Oregon to deal with more addicts than it can handle. Under Measure 110, those in possession of the now-legal drugs are issued a ticket that results in a theoretical $100 fine, but the penalty will be lifted once the individual calls a self-help line and seeks treatment. Not surprisingly, the system is a bust. Eugene’s police chief reported that out of 6,000 people cited, fewer than 125 followed through.

Continue reading →

Revisiting 2005’s “Good Night And Good Luck”: Yikes!

/ Jack Marshall / 4 Comments

Re-posted below from July, 2019 is an Ethics Alarms essay about the ironic and troubling thoughts George Clooney’s film “Good Night And Good Luck” triggered when I viewed the 2005 film for the first time.  I watched it again last night, and its commentary on politics, journalism, the McCarthy era and television struck me as even more relevant than it did the first time. I highly recommend seeing the film again, and definitely watch it if you missed the movie entirely.

The last line in the post was “I think George Clooney might want to watch it again.” Now, maybe not: I think George is smart enough to  understand its resonances now.  July 2019 was in the middle of the Trump Presidency, and the McCarthy era’s political use of imaginary conspiracy theories to impugn and destroy its enemies seemed uncannily similar to the Russian collusion witch hunt recently completed to try to bring down President Trump. But 2019 was before the Biden administration, and its concerted effort to use any means necessary to make the U.S. a single -party nation. McCarthy wanted to the public think the Democrats were surreptitiously advocating Communism as he and his allies employed totalitarian tactics to prevail. Today it is the Democrats who have chosen to make the public fear the other party, only in 2023, they really are embracing Marxism, and use Orwellian tactics to cast Republican as aspiring fascists. Continue reading →

It’s Not Just Democrats And Progressives Showing Their Ignorance: Candace Owens Joins The Hamas-Israel Ethics Train Wreck

/ Jack Marshall / 19 Comments

I’m relieved to say that I have only mentioned Candace Owens here occasionally and in passing, so I’m not embarrassed by her being revealed as an ignoramus. Owens’ shtick is that she’s an attractive, black, female conservative pundit who has supports Donald Trump. Who knows what she really believes, but conservatives jumped at having her around to annoy progressives. (Owens’ biography shows many flip-flops to advance her career, and little to indicate she is more than a skilled hustler with charisma and a good agent.)

Now their cynical embrace of an opinionated college journalism-major drop-out is coming back to bite them, and it serves them right. Owens has been flapping her gums on various forums accusing Israel of “genocide,” which, among other things, shows that she doesn’t know what the word means. The David Horowitz Freedom Center, a conservative organization that was complicit in allowing Owens to become a case study in the pundit Peter Principle, today washed its virtual hands of her, and emphatically so, saying in part,

Continue reading →

Irony: The Washington Post Telling CVS How To Handle Rampant Shoplifting

/ Jack Marshall / 11 Comments

…when it is the extreme anti-police, anti-law enforcement ideologues the Washington Post supports and slants the news to assist that are the reason shoplifting is out of control in D.C. and other cities.

The photo above that accompanies the laughable Post editorial shows the infamous CVS Pharmacy at 14th and Irving streets NW. There, in recent months, roving mobs of thieves have staged “smash and grab” mass raids resulting in the store having empty shelves and the local neighborhood having little access to needed supplies. “Shoplifters ransacked this CVS over two days early last month, and it hasn’t been restocked since,” the concerned editorial board wrote. “Weeks later, there’s still hardly anything to buy — or steal. The CVS at 14th and Irving symbolizes extreme retail theft and the harms it can engender. Distressing and inconvenient to ordinary people, threatening to businesses and livelihoods, and repellent to tourists, unchecked shoplifting can corrode a community’s spirit.”

The Post, which has never uttered a metaphorical “boo” regarding its woke, black Democratic mayor directing a huge, block letter “Black Lives Matter” message to be painted on a downtown street two years ago, is engaging in outrageous hypocrisy. “Black Lives Matter,” of course, means “Police Beware” and “Enforce the Law At Your Own Risk.” In related news, the Supreme Court today turned down Derek Chauvin’s last ditch appeal to get his unfair trial declared what it was; I’m assuming they don’t need the grief. They have to work in D.C. after all.

Continue reading →

More Capitol Riot Roshomon…

/ Jack Marshall / 5 Comments

Three videos from January 6…

What’s going on here? It’s pretty obvious, isn’t it?

The three videos are conclusive proof that there was no “insurrection” in the Capitol on January 6, 2021. You remember reading all of those French Revolution history accounts about how some of the peasants attacking the Bastille just peacefully wandered around the place, not bothering anyone, as the guards stood by, don’t you? You don’t? That’s because it didn’t happen. In an insurrection, everyone is attacking from the beginning. The January 6 incident was an ugly riot that grew spontaneously out of a demonstration.

This is why Liz Cheney’s video and the other cherry-picked videos showing the worst of the rioting are deceitful, like the entire corrupt hearings her committee inflicted on a gullible public. Republican cherry-picked videos showing peaceful demonstrators do not disprove the existence of the riot, but they do make the repeated mantra that this was an “insurrection” look like the partisan misinformation it was and continues to be.

Continue reading →

The Worst President Ever? Part 4.

/ Jack Marshall / 8 Comments

Surprise! You thought I had forgotten, didn’t you? It has been a long time, almost a year, since the last installment of this series, inspired by President Joe Biden’s spectacularly awful, divisive, incompetent and destructive first two years. Now it’s approaching three, and Biden looks worse than ever. I admit to being paralyzed after considering Woodrow Wilson in Part 3. It is hard to imagine a President being much worse than Wilson, which is remarkable, considering how long Democratic historians maintained the myth that he was one of our greatest chief executives. This fills me with hope that eventually history’s verdict on Barack Obama will align itself with objective reality, but I’m getting ahead of myself.

Since May on 2022, when I began this inquiry, the performance of President Biden has only worsened. Nonetheless, he still has more than a year to go, and that’s assuming that he does not get re-elected to a second term. To be fair, I should have divided this competition into two divisions, one for single term Presidents (or less), and the other for those who served more than one term. After all, Woodrow Wilson, the current head of the leaderboard, couldn’t possibly have done as much damage if he hadn’t been re-elected in 1916 with the now mordantly ironic slogan, “He Kept Us Out of the War.” I must admit, however, Biden has done a spectacular amount of harm in less than three years. It’s impressive.

Following Wilson came a President now routinely ranked as one of the worst, Warren G. Harding, #29 (1921-1923), and he didn’t make it through even three years, dying suddenly of cardiac arrest at the youthful age (by today’s Presidential standards) of 57. I began my lifetime fascination with the Presidency reading that Harding was tied with Buchanan and Johnson for the bottom of the barrel. The record just doesn’t support that assessment. While Harding was alive, he enjoyed more popularity than all but a few Presidents while in the White House. His low ranking is attributable to first, the eruption of several scandals, notably the Teapot Dome scandal, in his cabinet after his death, and second, the sordid accounts for Harding’s remarkable sexual profligacy and adultery. While no historian has asserted convincingly that Harding was himself corrupt or complicit in the scandals, he did appoint the crooks, and was accountable. Like Donald Trump, he appointed many cronies and allies who lacked the character and qualifications for public service. There was plenty of smoke that a more attentive POTUS would have sniffed out. As for the sexual misconduct, presumably post-Harding revelations about Bill Clinton and Jack Kennedy should place this in proper perspective. As several commentators have noted in recent decades of Harding historical rehabilitation, many of his accomplishments are impressive.

Continue reading →

The Rest Of The Story: The Mother Of That Six-Year-Old Who Shot His Teacher Is In Prison. GOOD!

/ Jack Marshall / 5 Comments

But some conservative pundits have a problem with that.

Ethics Alarms covered the revolting tale of the Newport News, Virginia second-grader who shot his teacher in a January post. The position here is and has always been that when children get their hands on guns and shoot anyone, including themselves, parents who own the guns should be held strictly responsible, and should go to jail. Amusingly, some commenters here thought I was jumping to conclusions assuming that parents were at fault in the Newport News case. “What happened to waiting for facts before making a judgement?” caviled one. MIA Ethics Alarms gadfly P.M. Lawrence (where have you been, P.M.?) offered several unlikely scenarios that didn’t involve parental misconduct. I was confident that Occam’s Razor applied, and that this was res ipsa loquitor: if a second grader shoots his teacher, the parents of that second grader are almost certainly at fault.

Continue reading →