Ethics Quote of the Week: The Washington Post

“Mr. Obama has spoken only once in public about the Libyan crisis. He has yet to condemn Mr. Gaddafi by name. He has not called for an end to the regime. He has expressed concern about protecting U.S. citizens – most of whom were evacuated from Libya on Friday – but has showed no intention of protecting the Libyans whom Mr. Gaddafi is slaughtering. The White House appears content to allow France and other nations to take the lead. But the reality is that as long as the president of the United States remains passive, the help Libyans are begging for will not come.”

—-The Washington Post, in an Editorial entitled “A Passive President”

President Obama is unilaterally abdicating the United States’ critical and honorable role as the world’s advocate for freedom and human rights. As President Obama calculated the political angles, people are dying at the hands of a mad dictator. He has condemned the Governor of Wisconsin with more intensity than he has Libya’s butcher.

There are certain sacred duties of being President Of the United States, and this one doesn’t apparently sit well with Obama’s famous “reserve.” It is the duty to lead the World to oppose evil, and he is ducking it as people die.

Cheers to the Washington Post for noticing, caring, and speaking out.

UPDATE: 2/26/11 The same day the Post ran its editorial, the White House announced that the President told Germany Chancellor Angela Merkel that “when a leader’s only means of staying in power is to use mass violence against his own people, he has lost the legitimacy to rule and needs to do what is right for his country by leaving now.” I suppose that covers “He has not called for an end to the regime” part of the Post’s indictment, though someone has to explain to me why Obama is condemning the Libyan dictator without mentioning his name ,and weirder still, only doing so by reporting what he has said to the German Chancellor.

Rep. Paul Broun: Failing the Duty to Confront and Failing America

"Who's going to shoot Obama?"

Conservative Rep. Paul Broun,  one of President Obama’s toughest critics, was holding a town hall meeting this week and received this question from an elderly supporter: “Who’s going to shoot Obama?”

The audience laughed (With embarrassment? With enjoyment at the thought?) and Broun chuckled. (Nervousness? Amusement?)  Then he said:

“The thing is, I know there’s a lot of frustration with this president. We’re going to have an election next year. Hopefully, we’ll elect somebody that’s going to be a conservative, limited-government president that will take a smaller, who will sign a bill to repeal and replace Obamacare.”

Wrong answer. Continue reading

Obama’s DOMA Decision: Ethical?

The talk show guest was fuming. “It’s a power grab,” he said, referring to President Obama’s decision that his Justice Department would no longer defend legal attacks on the Defense of Marriage Act, because he regarded the federal ban on gay marriage unconstitutional. “Worse yet, it’s a violation of his oath to defend the law of the land!”

AHA! An ethical argument to go with the legal and political ones! Is Obama violating his oath, which would be a breach of his duties of loyalty, responsibility, honesty and integrity? Continue reading

Now THIS Is Hypocrisy: Rep. Michael Capuano (D-Mass.)

Rep. Capuano says it's time...

Ethics Alarms has expanded its tutorial subject matter. We began by helping the satire and metaphor-challenged understand what does and didn’t constitute incivility ( putting Sarah Palin in a Victorian satirical song, no; calling Republicans Nazis, yes) and now will add the elusive concept of “hypocrisy” to the course list, for those, like Rush Limbaugh, who are confused about that as well.

Today’s lesson: Democratic Representative Michael Capuano of Somerville, Mass. When Arizona loon Jared Loughner killed a little girl, a judge, some other Arizonans, and grievously wounded Democratic Representative Gabrielle Giffords, Capuano was one of the Democrats who joined with some shameless voices in the media to suggest that the madman’s rampage was provoked by hot partisan rhetoric….specifically conservative rhetoric, since the victim was a Democrat. Continue reading

Hypocrisy Follies: The Ribbing of the First Lady

What's wrong with this picture?

Americans are becoming almost as confused about hypocrisy as they are about satire.

Michelle Obama’s Vail, Colorado vacation included taking her daughters out to eat ribs at Vail, and conservative radio critics immediately resorted the “H” word, led by Rush Limbaugh, who reported that the First Lady, fully-involved in an anti-obesity campaign, joined her own children in “feasting on ribs — ribs that were 1,575 calories per serving with 141 grams of fat, per serving.” Continue reading

The Remarkable Character of George Washington

Today is George Washington’s birthday, and it is appropriate for every American, and certainly every ethicist, to pause in awe of this unique and indispensable man. Ethics Alarms honors him today with his own words, showing the depth of his good character, good judgment and commitment to ethical conduct in a letter to a man who later betrayed his trust, Benedict Arnold. This is the letter sent to Arnold, then his most trusted subordinate in the Revolutionary War, as Arnold was preparing to invade Quebec.

Happy Birthday, General Washington. More than three hundred years later, you lead us still.

George Washington to Benedict Arnold
September 14, 1775. Continue reading

Worst Ethics Column of the Month: Michelle Goldberg’s “The Lara Logan Media Wars”

There’s nothing so pointless as complaining about a phenomenon that is logical, natural, useful and just, on the grounds that it’s so darn mean. Nevertheless, that is the gist of a Daily Beast column by Michelle Goldberg, another in the increasingly ethics-challenged stable of journalists being assembled at Tina Brown’s slick website.

Ruing the fate that befell journalist Nir Rosen after he not only ridiculed the horrendous attack on ABC reporter Lara Logan by an Egyptian mob, but implied that as a ‘war-monger” she deserved it, Goldberg wrote…

“…it indicated that Rosen has deep, unexamined problems with women, particularly women who are his more-celebrated competitors. But it was also appalling to realize that this brief, ugly outburst was going to eclipse an often-heroic career. The media’s modern panopticon has an awful way of reducing us all to the worst thing we’ve ever done…Again and again, we see people who make one mistake either forced out of their jobs or held up for brutal public excoriation. But the more we live in public, the more we need to develop some sort of mercy for those who briefly let the dark parts of themselves slip out, particularly when they’re truly sorry afterward.”

Ah, yes, the old “one mistake” plea! Continue reading

Presidents Day Ethics: The Presidents of the United States on Ethics and Leadership

In commemoration of President’s Day, Ethics Alarms presents the ethics wisdom of the remarkable men who have served their country in the most challenging, difficult, and ethically complicated of all jobs, the U.S. Presidency.

Ladies and Gentlemen, the Presidents of the United States:

George Washington: “I hope I shall possess firmness and virtue enough to maintain what I consider the most enviable of all titles, the character of an honest man.” Continue reading

Comment of the Day: “Ethics Carnage in Wisconsin: The Ethics Grades So Far”

Commenter Glenn Logan argues that President Obama’s C- Ethics Grade in the post is too high. Here is his Comment of the Day, on the post “Ethics Carnage in Wisconsin: The Ethics Grades So Far.”

“I think that Obama is getting grade inflation here. Obama was elected to lead all Americans, not just unions.

“While Walker’s position and comments may be imperfect, and Obama is certainly within his rights to disagree, it is his duty to all Americans to at least take the other side into account. Presidents who are entirely partisan are poor presidents, and in this instance, a C- is unfairly high.

“Combine that with his pronouncement to Republicans after he was elected that “Elections have consequences, and I won,” and in my view, you have an ethics train wreck.  This is as two-faced and unfair as it is possible to be, and dispatching his political organization to inject an even more partisan impact into the problem and the best grade I could give him is a D-.”

Ethics Carnage in Wisconsin: The Ethics Grades So Far

The battleground

The story to date: Wisconsin’s Republican Gov. Scott Walker announced a budget-repair measure to address  looming budget deficits (in a state with a balanced budget mandate in its constitution) by requiring state employees to contribute a larger proportion of their pensions and health care plans, and  restricting their long-standing  collective bargaining rights. Wisconsin’s deficit is projected at $30 million for the remainder of the 2011, with a shortfall of $1.5 billion projected for next year. In response to Walker’s announcement and the near certainty of his plan being passed by the Republican dominated state legislature, 14 Democratic legislators fled the state to prevent a quorum and block a vote, teachers left their classes to protest in Madison, where they were joined by thousands of pro-union protesters, many of whom were organized and bused in by Organizing for America, a White House operated political group.

Let’s try to separate the ethics wheat from the chaff—amazingly, there is actually some wheat–and get an early line on the heroes, dunces, villains, and the rest as the Wisconsin budget battle threatens to become a full-fledged Ethics Train Wreck. Continue reading