From Maine, A “Nah, the Democratic Party Doesn’t Embrace Censorship!” Head-Exploder….

Reacting to Maine state Rep. Laurel Libby‘s tweet above, the Maine House speaker and majority leader (Guess which party…) demanded that she take it down. Libby refused, so the body’s Democrats introduced a censure resolution. Their contrived reason: her post included photos and the first name of a minor, the male athlete who was allowed to compete in female-only sports. Both the photo and student’s name were publicly available and had been published by media sources. Obviously, this was an effort to silence an effort by an elected official to have the public understand “what’s going on here,” and, as we all know from the motto of an Axis-supporting newspaper of note, “Democracy Dies in Darkness.”

Continue reading

President Trump’s Third Term Fantasy

We’re back in Julie Principle territory again, unfortunately: “Fish gotta swim, bird’s gotta fly, Trump’s gong to keep saying crazy stuff to make progressives cry…” This is a particularly annoying example. Just as the position of Ethics Alarms is that trusted professionals do not have the luxury of pulling April Fool’s Day hoaxes on the public, it is also unethical for Presidents of the United States to deliberately raise phony issues for public consumption.

The President began raising the possibility of a third term almost from the moment he was elected to his second. It is, of course, impossible. The Constitution forbids it quite unambiguously thanks to the 22nd Amendment, the eventual Congressional reaction to Franklin Roosevelt shattering the unwritten rule, set by our first President, that two elected terms is enough. Over the weekend, Trump said he was “not joking” about there being “methods” to circumvent the two-term limit. No, there really aren’t and never mind that: Trump is 78 years old, not exactly in peak physical condition, and would be 86 at the end of a third term. The real question is whether he can complete this one.

Trump was even sparking speculation about a fantasy race between him and Barack Obama in 2028 for an unconstitutional third term, and a depressing number of morons on social media are taking it seriously. Yes, Dana, that’s your cue…

Here’s what’s happening. I was pondering Trump’s nonsense, and concluded that there are three things going on here, only one of which is substantive:

Continue reading

Ethics Hero: Harvard Law Professor Adrian Vermeule

I admit it: this post is putting the cart before the horse. I need to complete a post about the leftist lawyer freak-out over Trump targeting ostentatiously anti-Trump, anti-Republican, pro-Axis law firms by handing them the just desserts for their abandonment of legal ethics and core professional principles to pander to the Democratic Party’s cabal over the past 15 years or more. But I am a bit short of time and energy right now, and Professor Vermeule, that rarity of rarities, a conservative Harvard professor, has done some of my work for me.

Last week, more than ninety members of the Harvard Law School faculty issued a joint letter supposedly concerning the “rule of law,” but actually embracing the same double standards and anti-Trump bias I have been witnessing from my lawyer friends on Facebook and especially in the online discussions among members of the Association of Professional Responsibility Lawyers. It said in part,

“The rule of law is imperiled when government leaders:

  • single out lawyers and law firms for retribution based on their lawful and ethical representation of clients disfavored by the government, undermining the Sixth Amendment;
  • threaten law firms and legal clinics for their lawyers’ pro bono work or prior government service;
  • relent on those arbitrary threats based on public acts of submission and outlays of funds for favored causes; and
  • punish people for lawfully speaking out on matters of public concern.

While reasonable people can disagree about the characterization of particular incidents, we are all acutely concerned that severe challenges to the rule of law are taking place, and we strongly condemn any effort to undermine the basic norms we have described….”

This is disingenuous posturing by partisan academics pretending to be neutral patriots. Professor Vermeule called them out on their pretense, writing in part in an open letter to his own to students and the public,

Continue reading

Weekend Ethics Spring Bouquet

I recently noticed that one of my Facebook friends of long-standing whom I respect greatly is now officially bonkers, thank to the Trump Derangement pandemic. I find this more than sad: it’s terrifying that a lifetime of critical thinking and rational, balanced analysis can be unmoored simply by having too many friends and associates who are ignorant hysterics and not realizing that the news media you frequent every day is mind poison.

Lawyers and ethicists are being hit especially hard; the fact that almost all of my theater associates are freaking out is less of a shock, for most of them have always been this way. My legal ethics specialist listserv is in the process of melting down over a few well-reasoned objections to the most of the opinions being offered residing more in the realm of progressive politics than legal ethics. But Trump is a threat to the rule of law! There wasn’t any concern whatsoever expressed on this same platform when Donald Trump was being targeted by Democratic prosecutors so that their party could continue to hold power. If Merrick Garland or Joe Biden were even mentioned there in four years, I must have missed it. I was amused to see one of the loyal “non-partisan,””objective” ethicists defend the group’s obsession with Trump by quoting the “Man for All Seasons” speech about giving the Devil the benefit of the law (Guess who the Devil is!) as another resorted to the hoary “First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out..” quote from Martin Niemöller. Trump’s not the Devil, he’s Hitler! My friend, a retired partner in big D.C. law firm, is just about as impossible to argue with now as this idiot. Watching him devolve is like seeing a zombie movie…

Meanwhile,

Continue reading

Thoughts and Musings While Re-Watching “It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad, World,” Continued: Yes, It’s An Ethics Movie

Before I leave the first installment of this post and move on to the film’s ethical significance, I should mention that “It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad, World” caught a cultural wave perfectly, accounting for its box office success. In this it was just lucky, and that moment in time is now long gone, which is why the film appeals to me from a historical perspective more than as entertainment.

There have been many attempts to mine the same property for laughs, and none of the offspring of IAMMMMW have equaled its model in reputation or box office success. Blake Edward’s “The Great Race,” just two years later, was billed as the most expensive movie comedy ever made, and bombed. (Peter Falk is in both IAMMMMW and “The Great Race.”) In 2001, the “Airplane!” gang made “Rat Race,” which was obviously inspired by Kramer’s opus. It had a less starry cast (of course) and made a profit, but was generally regarded as a second rate (second rat?) version of the original. “Scavanger Hunt was a 1979 rip-off with a more IAMMMMW-like ensemble cast, and was a flop. Lesser attempts to recycle the film’s formula, “Midnight Madness” and “Million Dollar Mystery” (note the “m” alliterations) were even more embarrassing failures.

On to the ethics…Much was made of the fact that director Stanley Kramer had never directed or produced a comedy before. In fact, his career output was ostentatiously serious, and often criticized as preachy and overly preoccupied with moral-ethical conflicts. Among his most famous movies are “Judgement at Nuremberg,” “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner,” “Inherit the Wind,” “The Defiant Ones,” “On the Beach” and “Ship of Fools.” I’m sure that part of Kramer’s motivation for directing a huge slapstick comedy was to show his versatility, just as Spielberg felt that he needed to direct a movie musical with “West Side Story.” However, viewed in light of the times and Kramer’s artistic sensibilities, IAMMMMW now seems schizophrenic, a silly comedy with serious social commentary…and both parts undermine each other.

Continue reading

So Far, Flunking the Integrity Test of the “Signal Chat Ethics Train Wreck” [Part II]

In the interest of time—mine—I’m going to list the relevant developments and my observations as bullet points, with the full knowledge that I will be posting on this again, and probably soon. So here we go, into the wreckage…

Continue reading

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