Your Baseball Ethics Lesson of the Week…The Buck Weaver Story

Baseball season starts next week, bringing me memories of my happy childhood in Arlington, Mass. and how I would pass the golden summers there metaphorically glued to my transistor radio for all 162 Red Sox games except for the very few that I attended or saw on TV. My team’s games were broadcast on WHDH 850 AM in those days, with Curt Gowdy doing the play-by-play. Right before each game was a favorite feature on that station: “Warm-up Time,” a 5 minute story from baseball’s rich and often strange history. “It’s Warm-up Time!” each segment began, “Your baseball story before every Red Sox game! Don Gillis reporting for Atlantic Refineries!” Don had a great voice and a rich delivery, and taught me a lot over the years.

Don introduced me to the strange and tragic saga of the 1919 Black Sox, the fixed World Series, the bizarre aftermath, and how baseball Commissioner Kenesaw Mountain Landis banned for life all eight of the players alleged to have participated in the plot to make the American League champion White Sox to throw the Series to the vastly inferior Cincinnati Reds.

Among the banned: superstar “Shoeless” Joe Jackson, whose supporters argue that he should be allowed into the Hall of Fame to this day. Joe was glamorized in the movie and novel “Field of Dreams.” His defense was that he accepted money from gamblers to throw the Series but still played his best—hardly an ennobling theory, but plausible, since by all accounts “Shoeless” was an illiterate dolt. His familiar story was featured on “Warm-Up Time,” but I was always interested in another one of the banned eight, third baseman George “Buck” Weaver, sympathetically played by John Cusack in the movie “Eight Men Out.”

Continue reading

After Serious Reflection and Analysis, I Reached the Professional Opinion That This Couple Is Unethical

Tough one. (Kidding!)

In October 2023, a call to child welfare in Sissonville, West Virginia led authorities to a locked shed at the the home of Jeanne Kay Whitefeather, 62, and Donald Ray Lantz, 63. When they pried open the lock on the door, police found the couple’s 18-year-old daughter and her 16-year-old brother, both clad in filthy clothes, with a Port-a-Potty, no light, and no running water. One of the teens told police they had been locked in the barn without food for 12 hours, and had been forced to sleep on the concrete floor.

Police then broke into the main residence and discovered a 9-year-old girl, crying. Three hours later, Lantz arrived with an 11-year-old boy; Whitefeather soon followed with his 5-year-old sister. All five of the couple’s children were taken into custody by Child Protective Services as their parents were arrested. An investigation revealed that Lantz and Whitefeath had adopted the five black siblings in Minnesota, moved to a farm in Washington state in 2018, then moved to Sissonville in May of 2023.

The indictment stated that the couple targeted the five children because of they were black, and forced them into involuntary labor…slavery. Neighbors testified for the prosecution that they never saw the children playing but did see them standing in line and performing hard labor. The oldest daughter testified that most of their outdoor work took place at the family’s Washington farm, where some of them were forced to dig using only their bare hands. Testimony indicated that the children’s meals mostly consisted of peanut butter sandwiches at scheduled times.

Jeanne Kay Whitefeather was sentenced to 215 years in prison and Donald Lantz to 160 years after a jury found them guilty of forced labor, human trafficking, child abuse and neglect. “You brought these children to West Virginia, a place that I know as ‘almost heaven,’ and you put them in hell. This court will now put you in yours,” Circuit Judge Maryclaire Akers told the defendants at their sentencing last week. “And may God have mercy on your souls. Because this court will not.”

In a humorous note to this horrible story, the couple’s attorneys approached some kind of record for desperate defense arguments. Their basic strategy was to claim the couple was just “overwhelmed,” and that being bad parents isn’t a crime. Whitefeather’s attorney, Mark Plants, said during closing arguments “These are farm people that do farm chores,” Plants said. “It wasn’t about race. It wasn’t about forced labor.”

Right. I don’t think that even qualifies as a “nice try.”

I would like to know how a couple is approved to adopt five children without rigorous screening. I know that it is desirable to keep siblings together if possible—they had been removed from their biological parents after being abused by them—but five seems excessive unless the adoptive family is named Kennedy or Warbucks.

Ethics Short Takes

[I could and probably should do full posts on all three of these, but I still haven’t finished my promised Musk Derangement post, and I fear these items will be left neglected if I don’t cover them right away.]

1. President Trump signed an order beginning the process of eliminating the Dept. of Education and folding its essential functions back into other departments. Good. An act of Congress will be necessary to complete the dismantling, but if there is anyone with an honest, rational, statistically sound argument for why this Department should not go away, I haven’t heard or read it yet. The data is pretty damning: U.S. kids are doing much worse now than when the department was begun under President Carter. Post hoc ergo propter hoc and all that, but still, it’s hard to argue that a federal department overseeing an area that has deteriorated under its watch over almost 50 years has a case for continuing. Never mind. The Axis is freaking out anyway. Someone really ought to tell them that occasionally admitting that the President has done something responsible and justified might do wonders for their credibility.

Continue reading

An Ugly “Lookism”-Kings Pass Hybrid

Above is a photo of then-high school pole-vaulter Allison Stokke. Stokke was made into an involuntary pin-up when the photo was posted in 2008 to a sports blog, along with the caption: “Meet pole vaulter Allison Stokke… Hubba hubba and other grunting sounds.” The image went “viral” making her an instant celebrity, and sex symbol. As I wrote in 2021, “Oh, Allison did just fine: she became a model and married a pro-golfer. But that’s moral luck. Her photo might have triggered an obsession by a sheik who had her kidnapped and brought to his harem as a sex slave. You never know.”

This is just one of the ugly pathologies social media has inflicted on us. Even more people than before the internet are obsessed with appearances, particularly since the culture now actively cultivates narcissism. (I will never take a selfie to my dying day.) A particularly nauseating example occurred this week, when University of Georgia student Lily Stewart was arrested on March 8 for speeding, Morgan County Crime shared Stewart’s mugshot with her arrest information, and the photo went “viral” to the extent that the British tabloid The Daily Mail treated it as a news story.

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

The 2024 Gallup “Americans’ Ratings of Honesty and Ethics of Professions”

I write a post about this annual Gallup survey every year, but my observations apart from the obvious have been increasingly redundant. This will be reflected in my comments this year as well, largely because little has changed significantly since 2023. Gallup writes in its introduction,

Gallup began measuring public trust in various professions in 1976, initially covering 14 jobs. Over the years, the list has changed, with some occupations added and others removed. Since 1999, 11 professions have been tracked annually, while others have been included periodically.

The average very high/high ethics rating of the core 11 professions has decreased from routinely 40% or higher in the early 2000s to closer to 35% during most of the 2010s. It rose slightly in 2020, to a seven-year high of 38%, reflecting enhanced public trust in healthcare workers and teachers during the pandemic. Thereafter, the average declined each year through 2023, when it reached 30%, and it held there in 2024. This mirrors the long-term decline in Americans’ confidence in U.S. institutions.

There is mordant humor in that text: the enhanced public trust in healthcare workers and teachers was wildly misplaced. The healthcare profession was inept and dishonest during the pandemic, and the teachers unions crashed the economy by lobbying to keep the schools closed for their own interests. It also reflects the trend I’ve see in these surveys for years: the public tends to trust occupations they have to trust, explaining why pharmacists and nurses have always been among the most trusted professions.

One reason the trust freefall has slowed, I believe, is that so many professions are trusted so little now that there isn’t much farther for them to fall. Only 8% of those surveyed trust Congress strongly: I’d assume that just the number of apathetic ignoramuses in the population would account for that number. It will be interesting to see if this clown show…

…drives trust in Congress lower still in the 2025 survey. And who knows what horrors are to come?

Continue reading

The Ethics of Deporting Mahmoud Khalil For Pro-Terrorist Advocacy, II.

Shortly after posting a discussion of conservative legal scholar Illya Somin’s article at Reason declaring the Trump administration’s effort to deport Mahmoud Khalil “unjust and unconstitutional,” I became aware of the article at City Journal in which conservative legal scholar Ilya Shapiro defends the policy as legal and constitutional. It is clear from the essay that he also believes the policy is appropriate and ethical.

Continue reading

The Ethics of Deporting Mahmoud Khalil For Pro-Terrorist Advocacy, I.

ICE arrested Palestinian activist and former Columbia student Mahmoud Khalil with the intent of deporting him in accordance with the announced Trump policy of deporting non-citizens who engage in pro-“terrorist” speech related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Predictably, the Axis is all-in supporting Khalil, who sure appears to be a bad human hill to die on. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez condemned ICE’s detainment of Mahmoud Khalil, calling it a “tyrannical” move, “Violating rule of law, actually,” she wrote. That AOC defends him alone makes me inclined to want to get rid of the guy, but that would be irrational. Judge Jesse Furman of the Southern District of New York issued an order today halting Khalil’s processing and scheduled a hearing on the case for later this week. Ah yes, the Southern District of New York!

In a confusing essay at The Volokh Conspiracy, Ilya Somin writes that deporting non-citizens for the content of their speech is a First Amendment violation and “a slippery slope,” then, in the fifth paragraph, acknowledges that 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(3), bars “Any alien who … endorses or espouses terrorist activity or persuades others to endorse or espouse terrorist activity or support a terrorist organization.” I’d say endorsing and supporting Hamas qualifies under that law, wouldn’t you? So Somin says, “Such laws, too, should be ruled unconstitutional.” But until and unless it is, the Trump administration has the law on its side.

The question remains, is such a restriction on the free speech of non-citizens ethical? Somin:

“The First Amendment’s protection for freedom of speech, like most constitutional rights, is not limited to US citizens. The text of the First Amendment is worded as a general limitation on government power, not a form of special protection for a particular group of people, such as US citizens or permanent residents. The Supreme Court held as much in a 1945 case, where they ruled that “Freedom of speech and of press is accorded aliens residing in this country.”

Continue reading

Monday Ethics Catch-Up, 3/10/25

That meme above was just posted on my Facebook page today by a previously functional Georgetown Law Center lawyer of mu acquaintance. Could the whining of the Trump Deranged be any more humiliating and irrational? How tragic: a duly elected President of the United States is following through on his campaign promises in record time. Or is the whiny Democrat on the verge of tears because her party is behaving like seven-year olds? I doubt it.

In a comment I made to this post, explaining why some of my friends whom I know well, respect, and have seen fall into the pit of despond since Trump 2.0 got underway, I wrote in part,

First, there are many liberals, many of them devout Christians, who really do think that the United States should be in the business of income re-distribution and hard government over-sight of virtually all individual activities. Even though they know government is untrustworthy and incompetent as well as corrupt, they won’t give up—or are in denial about–the dream. They also somehow thought that the US was really on the way to this Nirvana, and living in a bubble—the arts, education, academia, the non-profit sector, they have been bombarded for years by one-way propaganda. They also tend to trust the news media, which is dominated by people with a similar orientation. Such individuals, who may be wise and perceptive in most other areas, shift to pure emotion now because they were under the influence of the mirage that the country was overwhelmingly in favor of the nanny state, and it isn’t and never was. Trump is the most jarring human splash of ice water in the face that these people could experience, so their reaction is visceral, emotional (angry) and irrational.

We need to learn from people who react this way. My sister, for example, is essentially furious now all the time. It’s all rooted, unfortunately in hatred for Trump, some of it legitimately based on one comment or another, some on class prejudice and intellectual snobbery, a lot on ignorance of history and leadership, and too much on getting lied to by the news media. My sister, for example, insisted that the GOP was to blame for the illegals tidal wave because Trump killed the bill that was the best that anyone could do to stem that tide. But that was just an Axis lie, as Trump made clear in his SOTU. He didn’t need that law, and neither did Biden. My sister is also very intelligent about most things, but regarding Trump she is a fully programed useful idiot.

I don’t know how these people can be saved.

Then there are the completely ethically crippled Trump Deranged responsible for these bumper-stickers…

I have yet to discover what group or collection of psychopaths is responsible for them, but the way Democratic officials have been acting of late, I would not be surprised to find their origin to be from some pretty damning places.

In other ethics news…

Continue reading

KABOOM! My Head Just Exploded! Biden’s Executive Orders Used an Autopen???

Wait, what? An Executive Order can be legal and go into effect without a President actually signing it? A so-called “autopen signature” counts? EVEN WHEN THE PRESIDENT MAY NOT BE CAPABLE OF KNOWING WHAT HE’S “SIGNING”?

A Heritage Foundation investigation has discovered that the majority of official documents signed by President Joe Biden used the same autopen signature. The Oversight Project, which is an initiative within the conservative Heritage Foundation that investigates the government, announced, “We gathered every document we could find with Biden’s signature over the course of his Presidency. All used the same autopen signature except for the announcement that the former President was dropping out of the race last year. Here is the autopen signature,” the group said, attaching photo examples like these:

Continue reading