Government & Politics

It’s Come to This: Yesterday’s Incompetence Is Today’s Brilliant Innovation

/ Jack Marshall / 8 Comments

When I saw the photo above and followed the reports like this one…

… I was certain that I had posted on an almost identical story a few years ago. And I had…with one significant difference.

The photo above comes from the Montgomery Township in Pennsylvania, where authorities have introduced wavy lane patterns on some streets. The regular lane patterns have been replaced by curved and zig-zagged lines. Montgomery Township officials explain that the erratic lane margins are their solution to too many speeding automobiles on some of the most trafficked streets. They are “traffic-calming measures.” “Our Highway Safety Officers and Traffic Engineers have determined that this is the best course of action for the area to ensure the safety of the local residents,” Montgomery Township police wrote in a Facebook post.

That’s funny: back in 2022, an Ethics Alarms “Res Ipsa Loquitur” post featured this, from Hollister, California:

In that instance, the wavy lines were definitely not by design. Hollister Mayor Igancio Velzaquez explained, “It just comes down to the contractor. Somebody didn’t read the plans correctly. It was not designed to look very odd.”

You may agree with me that the intentional eccentric lines look like a mistake, and the the accidental lines in Hollister look intentional, but that is neither here not there.

And I’m with Hollister. If there’s too much speeding an a section of a street, put up speed limit signs with reduced numbers. Pull over drivers. Up the fines for speeding. Speed humps are a lousy way to control traffic, but they are better than this nonsense. Heck, why stop at wavy lines? Try broken glass! Puppies in glass cages in the middle of the road! Land mines! Okay, maybe that’s a bit extreme, but why not set up fun obstacles, and make the street like a miniature golf course?

Ethics Verdict: The President’s Executive Orders On Chris Krebs and Miles Taylor

/ Jack Marshall / 8 Comments

This is easy: irresponsible, petty and stupid.

President Trump signed a pair of executive orders directing that there be federal investigations and other sanctions against high-profile administration critics from his first term. The first is former homeland security official Miles Taylor. He’s the jerk who wrote the anonymous New York Times op-ed in 2018 boasting about how he and others were working behind the scenes to sabotage the first Trump term. describing an internal resistance to Trump in his first term. The other is Christopher Krebs, the former head of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), who worked to oppose Trump’s claims that the 2020 election was “fixed” and “stolen,” and was was subsequently fired.

In the case of Taylor, the President implied in his remarks that he engaged in “treason,” which is a stretch, to put it lightly. Krebs was fired: that should have been punishment enough. In either case, Trump has bigger fish to fry, as the saying goes, and these orders do nothing to advance his agenda.

Continue reading →

Why Hasn’t This Been a Headline Yet?

/ Jack Marshall / 8 Comments

My Wuhan Virus-phobic friends and relatives pooh-poohed my assertion that the pandemic death statistics were being hyped and inflated by the news media and the CDC to keep the public terrified and in doors (and, quite possibly, unable to participate in a fair election.) For all I know they still don’t believe it, in part because the infuriating hasn’t been shouted from the roof-tops. A lead story on ever news network and a headline in every newspaper would be appropriate. It shouldn’t take all that, of course: I figured out we were being conned when the New York Times started running scare obituaries about 92-year-old black women who were “killed by Covid” while they were also suffering from cancer, high blood pressure and diabetes.

I had, frankly, forgotten about the fact that the news media still hasn’t taken responsibility for their unethical fear-mongering until I stumbled upon this, from July 18, 2023, in the 17th paragraph of a New York Times subscriber newsletter piece called “A Positive COVID Milestone” by David Leonhardt. He was one of the worst of the Times’ progressive op-ed writers until he was demoted. Leonhardt wrote: “The official number [of Wuhan deaths] is probably an exaggeration because it includes some people who had [the] virus when they died even though it was not the underlying cause of death….CDC data suggests that almost one-third of official recent Covid deaths have fallen into this category. A study published in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases came to similar conclusions.”

Continue reading →

Some Funny Things Happened on the Way to the Ethics Alarms Friday Forum…

/ Jack Marshall / 23 Comments

Last week’s open forum was wild, man, and I hope today’s can be as lively.

Based on the early returns, there’s a lot to bloviate about in the ethics world. The amateur golf champ playing in the Masters was caught pissing into a creek on n the 13th hole at Augusta National golf course. Pennsylvania judge Sonya McKnight was just convicted of shooting her sleeping boyfriend in the head. (Seems awfully judgmental…). Almost all Democrats in the House voted against the bill requiring voter ID in Federal elections. Yes, their determination to prove the cognitive dissonance scale wrong continues apace! A black Congressman tried to discuss issues with a Trump-Deranged white female and was called a “race traitor”…

…and we learned that after VP JD Vance’s March visit to Pituffik Space Base in Greenland, the Col. Susan Meyers, the commander of the 821st Space Base Group who also oversees the Pentagon’s northernmost military base, issued a gratuitous email to the base’s personnel stating that he did not speak for her of the base. What an idiot. (She was fired.) Finally, we have this stupid incident, in which Frontier Airlines let a woman fly to Puerto Rico with her “emotional support parrot” but wouldn’t let the bird on the return flight. (Gift link.)

Be careful. It’s stupid out there…

Nobody Should Trust The News Media Anyway, But Trusting It After This Is Unconscionable…

/ Jack Marshall / 7 Comments

How infuriating.

Ex-NBC News chief political analyst and “Meet the Press” host Chuck Todd was a guest on “Piers Morgan Uncensored” on yesterday, and when Morgan asked Todd “why was the mainstream media so reluctant” to cover President Biden’s mental state, especially when “everyone was seeing [it] with their own eyes,” Todd offered this: “The only thing I can chalk it up to is this, whatever you want to call it, this fear that some members of the media had sometimes that they would be perceived as helping Trump if they somehow diminished Biden, right?”

NO, you despicable asshole, NOT right! Your job is to report the facts that the public not only should know but has to know in order to govern themselves effectively, not to decide which facts will benefit a particular individual, policy or party and censor accordingly. Right before that damning statement, Todd said the American public should have been able to figure out that President Biden was failing cognitively because the media had been “subtle” in its coverage. “I would argue the reason people were able to come to their own conclusion on Joe Biden is because of the media coverage,” Todd said. “Look, we were subtle. ‘He’s using the back staircase. He’s not using the front staircase.’ ‘Hey, he’s not doing any interviews.’”

This isn’t a game of charades, you incomparable fool! The public isn’t supposed to have to guess what’s going on based on the clues you and your fellow propagandists for the Democrats are willing to reveal.

Over at Instapundit there has been a mantra repeated often lately: “No matter how much you hate these people, it isn’t enough.” Todd, the most inept and untrustworthy host of “Meet the Press’ in its long and once distinguished history, is among the worst of the worst in his field: he’s biased, he’s partisan, and he’s just not very bright.

Law vs. Ethics (Again): The AP Wins Its Lawsuit

/ Jack Marshall / 31 Comments

When the Associated Press refused to rename the Gulf of Mexico the “Gulf of America” in its style book, the White House excluded the once-essential news organization from its press briefings.The AP filed a lawsuit arguing that this was a violation of the First Amendment by the Trump Administration, as an infringement on the Freedom of the Press and the first Amendment.

Yesterday U.S. District Court Judge Trevor McFadden ruled in the AP’s favor, granting the AP’s motion for a preliminary injunction. Judge McFadden acknowledged that there is no constitutional right to attend a press briefing at the White House:

[T]his injunction does not limit the various permissible reasons the Government may have for excluding journalists from limited-access events. It does not mandate that all eligible journalists, or indeed any journalists at all, be given access to the President or nonpublic government spaces. It does not prohibit government officials from freely choosing which journalists to sit down with for interviews or which ones’ questions they answer. And it certainly does not prevent senior officials from publicly expressing their own views……[But]while the AP does not have a constitutional right to enter the Oval Office, it does have a right to not be excluded because of its viewpoint….

Continue reading →

Comment of the Day: “How Should We Deal With Friends Who Believe Ridiculous Conspiracy Theories?”

/ Jack Marshall / 4 Comments

Another epic and irritatingly rational Comment of the Day from Extradimensional Cephalopod, this one on the thorny topic of discussing unlikely conspiracy theories with true believers. Almost all of E.C.’s contributions to Ethics Alarms topics are helpful and impressive; this is one of his—its?—best.

This is Extradimensional Cephalopod’s Comment of the Day on the post, “How Should We Deal With Friends Who Believe Ridiculous Conspiracy Theories?”:

Your friend has arrived at a conclusion that is based on, generously speaking, an implausible interpretation of the evidence surrounding the Titanic’s disaster. If he were looking at the evidence with no biases, he presumably would not have come to this conclusion. Therefore, I suspect that he has either an emotional attachment to the conclusion, or an emotional attachment to the process he used to reach it.

An person’s attachment to a conclusion might be as personal as a belief about what that conclusion says about them or someone they respect, or it might be as impersonal as preferring a more pleasant view of the world, such as one where disasters don’t just happen by accident.

An attachment to the reasoning process may be based on a fear of not having a good alternative reasoning process to turn to, a fear of what conclusions those alternative processes might lead to, or (similarly) an attachment to another conclusion that they arrived at through their current process. For example: “I have to believe this person wearing a cape is a bad person, because if people who aren’t bad can wear capes, that means that maybe I did a bad thing by attacking those other people for wearing capes.”

I’d like to talk with your friend and see how his worldview compares to what I suspect it is. My preliminary hypothesis is that your friend’s subconscious reasoning process is loosely based on the following premises, which I am not rendering judgment on at this time:

Continue reading →

Comment of the Day: “Tariffs Have Been Needed For Decades”

/ Jack Marshall / 21 Comments

I meant to post this retort to Steve Witherspoon’s guest column yesterday (as it was “Tariffs Monday” at Ethics Alarms, but was waylaid by life. Canadian EA correspondent Humble Talent began a long and lively debate thread with his Comment of the Day, and I encourage you to read it all, here. Meanwhile, here’s Humble…

Oh! I almost forgot: I read another anti-tariff piece today titled “I Shot the Tariff.” I should have thought of that. Phooey.

…

I’m always disappointed when there’s something that I’m actually familiar with in the media, because a lot of the media smudging that happens around the areas that they’re familiar with stand out like a sore thumb.

Tariffs have been one of those things. And this attack on Free Trade is another.

You want to know what’s bullshit? The idea that any nation can pull of autarky (“a system where a country or region aims for self-sufficiency, minimizing or eliminating international trade and relying primarily on its own resources and production.”) No one can pull off autarky and maintain efficiency, product diversity, and quality of life. You will eventually need to trade for something.

You want an example for America? Potash. There are exactly three active potash mines in America, because the resource effectively does not exist in America. You import 96% of potash used for crop fertilizer. Without potash imports, you would be unable to add phosphorus to your crop input chemistry, and your yields would suffer. Which would then impact your already insufficient food production system. Your people would literally starve. Which means there will be trade.

Continue reading →

The National Parks’ Dumb Response To Trump’s “No DEI” EO Explains So, So Many Things…

/ Jack Marshall / 13 Comments

The National Park Service website has an Underground Railroad page. It used to feature a large photograph of the remarkable female “conductor,” Harriet Tubman (left above). The page began, “The Underground Railroad — the resistance to enslavement through escape and flight, through the end of the Civil War — refers to the efforts of enslaved African Americans to gain their freedom by escaping bondage.” But some boob or combination of boobs thought that the Trump EOs and other measures aimed at purging divisive, partisan and often discriminatory “diversity, equity and inclusion” programs from the government, education and other private institutions mandated eliminating straightforward and historically accurate information. It wasn’t just the National Parks Service, of course. The Defense Department also eliminated many pages that celebrated important minority veterans, such as civil rights champion and icon, Jackie Robinson.

Continue reading →

Not Opinion, FACT: AG Bondi Is Wrong and Unethical To Suspend Justice’s Acting Deputy Director of the Office of Immigration Litigation

/ Jack Marshall / 10 Comments
- This is your opinion? - It's a fact.

I was afraid of this.

I am completely in sympathy with President Trump’s determination to have only people he can trust as his department and agency heads after his first term debacle, when so many people stabbed him in the back that his suits must have looked like pin cushions. Nonetheless, appointing Pam Bondi as Attorney General was reckless and hard to defend, as Bondi and “legal ethics” have seldom been compatible. This episode is a particularly blatant example.

Erez Reuveni has worked at the Justice Department for nearly 15 years, most recently as the acting deputy director of the Office of Immigration Litigation. Reuveni appeared in federal court in Maryland last week to respond to the court’s questions regarding the government’s admission that it should not have deported Kilmar Abrego García on March 15 as part of the airlift of purported gang members to the Terrorism Confinement Center in El Salvador. Reuveni acknowledged the mistake and told a judge that he did not know what authority the U.S. used to deport Abrego García. “My answer to a lot of these questions is going to be frustrating,” Reuveni told U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis. “And I’m frustrated that I don’t have answers to a lot of these questions.” Xinis ordered the Trump administration to arrange the return of Abrego García, who is married to a U.S. citizen, by no later than 11:59 p.m. today.

Attorney General Bondi promptly suspended Reuveni. Bondi explained, “At my direction, every Department of Justice attorney is required to zealously advocate on behalf of the United States. Any attorney who fails to abide by this direction will face consequences.”

Continue reading →