Make it hot, hot hot!
First Open Forum Of August!
Make it hot, hot hot!
U.S. Society
Ethics Heroes: Christy Turlington, Kate Winslet, Julia Roberts, Meryl Streep Et Al.
All of the above named middle-aged female celebrities have spoken out against how their industry pressure —along with the culture—women to resort to cosmetic surgery to continue appearing marketably youthful. Jane Fonda, who is pictured above, once made similar statements and then had herself surgically transformed into a walking, talking, Madam Tussaud’s exhibit. She is in her mid-eighties, and that’s what is regarded as good cosmetic surgery.
Turlington, the supermodel who is now 54, disagrees.“Women who have stayed away from augmentation of themselves — those are the women I really admire,” she told Marie Claire.” I love seeing a real face. A face of someone who’s lived life. They have the kind of faces I like to see, and we don’t get to see as many of those in the world anymore….I will be one of those faces. I am one of those faces.” She added, “I don’t think it looks good. Maybe I would think differently if I thought it looked good, and it didn’t hurt and it didn’t send bad messages to young people. But I’ve never seen someone who I’ve been like, ‘Oh, that’s a good idea.’ It looks freaky to me.”
Ethics Dunce (Again): Fox News
From the New York Times today:
Shortly after learning he was being indicted a third time, former President Donald J. Trump had a private dinner with the top leadership at Fox News as they lobbied him to attend the first Republican presidential primary debate this month, three people familiar with the event said.
The dinner between Mr. Trump, the Fox News president Jay Wallace and the network’s chief executive, Suzanne Scott, was held in a private dining room at Mr. Trump’s golf club in Bedminster, N.J., according to two of the people familiar with the event. The dinner was scheduled before the indictment news.
In a break from its recent practice, the Times did not attempt to spin or characterize the facts in order to make its usual anti-Trump, anti-Fox, anti-conservative points. It didn’t have to.
Weaponizing Climate Change Hysteria For Political Gain, Part 2
Ethics Alarms usually avoids the familiar fake news clickbait approach of discussing what might happen, what a President is allegedly considering doing, or worst case scenarios. In this instance, however, I will make an exception.
The reason is evident above. The Biden Administration increasingly is accessing totalitarian strategies and rhetoric. One of its favored abuses of power is weaponizing the climate change hysteria being spread by that cult. There has been rampant speculation that President Biden will use climate change to declare a “national emergency” under the 1976 National Emergencies Act. I view such a move as, first, inevitable with the current Democratic Party, and second, an existential threat to democracy that requires an effective and decisive counter-response, ranging from legal challenges to organized public protests. It’s time—past time, really—to start planning.
John Kerry, the special presidential climate envoy who flies around the world in a jet to tell conferences about the perils of carbon pollution, told the New York Times last week that the debate within the administration isn’t about whether a “climate change emergency” should be declared, but when. Biden, meanwhile, Biden told reporters on July 20, “As president, I have a responsibility to act with urgency and resolve when our nation faces clear and present danger. And that’s what climate change is about. It is literally, not figuratively, a clear and present danger.”
I would view Biden’s invoking of the National Emergency Act as the equivalent of illicitly declaring martial law as a means to dictatorial power. As the left-leaning Brennan Center for Justice explains, the purpose of the law is “to temporarily enhance executive power during unexpected crises that are moving too fast for Congress to respond.” By that definition, it is ridiculous to call “climate change” an emergency, and Biden rhetoric, as usual, suggests that he is either misleading the public, doesn’t understand what he’s talking about, or both.
By declaring a climate emergency, Biden, meaning the climate change-deranged Democratic Party, could halt crude oil exports, suspend offshore oil and gas drilling, restrict international trade in fossil fuels, order the construction of renewable energy systems in “climate-vulnerable communities,” and use Defense Production Act (DPA) funds to advance the use of “clean energy” technology, like electric cars, which don’t really help the situation at all. Biden could also halt hundreds of billions of dollars in international fossil-fuel financing.
Another Unlikely Ethics Problem From “The Affair”
This one isn’t an ethics quiz; I know the answer. Maybe you’ll disagree.
In the final, 5th season of Showtime’s Chaos Theory and ethics series “The Affair,” the ethics carnage radiating from the now over-and-done-marriage-destroying tryst between Alison and Noah is still powerful. Alison is dead (murdered); Noah is out for prison, and teaching at a charter school in LA. His first wife and kids are also in LA, having followed her new, reliable, loving partner Vik, a surgeon, to a new post at a prestigious hospital.
But Vik is diagnosed with Stage 4 pancreatic cancer. He knows it’s incurable, and stubbornly refuses treatment. Asked by Helen, Noah’s wife before “The Affair,” what she can do, he answers, “Have my baby.” (That’s a selfish request, but it’s a different issue). Overwhelmed by self-pity, the prospect of impending death, and a “why me?” mood, plus being drunk and depressed after learning that Helen can’t have any more children at 50, Vik falls into bed with Sierra (above), a New Age, moon-ring, crystal-loving, 20-year-old woman-child hippie idiot next door. SHE gets pregnant as a result, and decides to keep the baby.
Helen learns about this as her crypto-husband (they never formally wed) is on his death bed. Later, after promising Vik, Helen tells Sierra that she will do what she can to help her with her now deceased sort-of husband’s offspring, because he so wanted to have a piece of himself live on, or something.
Now it’s nine months later. Sierra, an aspiring actress with IQ of a sponge, has invited about 20 New Age friends into her home to witness the birth of her child, “naturally,” in her living room. They romp around chanting, toking and dancing with funny things on their heads. Meanwhile, Sierra has been in labor for 24 hours, and a woman who may or may not be a trained midwife is telling her that her “negative energy” is keeping the baby from feeling welcome and other nonsense.
Sierra is exhausted and in pain. Helen shows up and Sierra shouts out that she can’t stand the pain and wants to go to the hospital. The acting midwife says that this is typical of first-time mothers under the influence of “negative energy,” and that Sierra doesn’t mean it. Helen is worried about the baby and Sierra.
What should she do?
Weaponizing Climate Change Hysteria For Political Gain, Part I
Apparently, the political left has no ethics alarms whatsoever when it sees an opportunity to gain crushing power. That’s the unavoidable message conveyed by two ominous developments—both so far only portending possible real world consequences while expressing Democratic Party aspirations of overwhelming dominance—regarding climate change fearmongering.
First, we learned that four Democratic Senators, the Marxist from Vermont, Bernie Sanders, Ed Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat (and you know what that means) Jeff Merkley from Oregon, which is as at least as wokified as Mass., and Native American Elizabeth Warren sent a letter to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland urging him to sue the fossil fuel industry. “Big oil has known for decades that they are fueling the climate crisis and lied to hide it,” Markey tweeted. “Now, we’re seeing record-breaking temperatures and unprecedented damage. We must hold them accountable for their misleading, unforgivable campaigning.”
Typical: Markey issues misleading public statements while saying that the oil industry is guilty of misleading the public. 1) There are no “record-breaking temperatures” because there’s no way to tell what the records are. This Big Lie all by itself marks Markey as science dunce and a climate change propaganda hack. NASA has repeatedly said that it is impossible to determine global temperatures with sufficient accuracy to declare “records” before methods of measurement existed. 2) “Unprecedented damage” is meaningless gibberish. 3) Oil companies have every right to protect their business and serving the public interest by countering purely speculative and politically motivated doomsday lobbying by irresponsible activists.
Nate Silver Tells The Truth About Media Bias: Ethics Hero
The only surprising aspect of Nate Silver’s latest substack essay is that he actually wrote it and had the courage to put it on the web. He is honest about mainstream media bias, and until he got kicked off his own creation, the 538 blog, Silver was a willing accomplice in this rot in the foundation of our democracy, making a lot of money in the process. Now—finally—he’s using his substantial critical thinking and research skills to expose the bad guys (his former pals before they rejected him : yes, I suspect there’s a measure of vengeance in this)who continue to successfully warp public knowledge and the process of an informed democracy by convincing sufficient number of ovine citizens that the concept of progressive media bias is a right-wing conspiracy theory. The focus of his traitorous analysis is how Elon Musk’s takeover of Twitter has helped address the effects of the media’s partisan bias.
In “Twitter, Elon and the Indigo Blob,” Silver becomes one of the very few progressives of note to admit what has been going on under their cultural assault. Some others include Glenn Greenwald, Matt Taibbi, and Bari Weiss, but Silver is more scientific and detached than any of them, and as a result, his analysis is more persuasive and, I hope, more disruptive to the blue wall of silence the progressive Borg has erected around a throbbing, obvious, disgusting truth.
On The Ethically Depressing GOP Presidential Field
The New York Times gave us the chart above, in an article about how the “he could shoot someone at high noon in central park and we wouldn’t care” Trump “base” will make a Republican effort to nominate a responsible, respectable, competent candidate for President difficult if not impossible. Look at that array! And my sister, a Democrat, complains that her party’s options are terrible, which they are.
How can a nation this large and diverse have no leaders who seem capable of doing the top job ethically and well? This is a societal, cultural, systemic failure.
That a character like Donald Trump, former POTUS or not, can have that kind of overwhelming support in the midst of indictments, the long, long trail of ridiculous and offensive statements, and his disqualifying conduct of refusing to accept his electoral defeat yet tells us that something is deeply rotten in the state of America. And whatever that state of rotteness is, returning either Joe Biden or Trump to the White House would be an invitation to too many disasters to contemplate.
But let’s start from the bottom of the list, where hope blooms. Nobody wants Chris Christie to run. Good. He was an ethics villain in 2016, knocking off Trump’s adversaries in the debates when he had the rhetorical tools and ammunition to take out Trump the way he reduced poor Marco Rubio to a laughing stock. Then Christie endorsed Trump, whom he knew was unfit, in a corrupt quid pro quo deal, probably to be Vice-President, which Trump reneged on. Then Christie was out to get Trump again, but it was too late. The one-time rising GOP star’s star was already permanently tarnished by his George Washington Bridge fiasco anyway. He’s running to get headlines and speaking fees, I guess. That he has almost no support speaks almost as well for the Republican voters as their support for Trump is damning.
Vivek Ramaswamy is the GOP equivalent of tech entrepreneur Andrew Yang in the last cycle for the Democrats. He’s not a serious candidate, and anyone who thinks he is doesn’t understand the American Presidency. Like Christie, he’s just static in the race, and a distraction. In a very important election like the one approaching, causing static and distractions is unethical.
The Bizarro World Ethics Of “Disparate Impact”
This makes sense only in a distorted reality where people deliberately ignore the obvious and insist that facts don’t matter. You know, like Superman Comics’ Bizarro World, where the stupid populace eats the plates and throws away the food.
A complaint filed with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) last week by the group HOPE Fair Housing Center argues that landlords who refuse to rent to applicants with a history of not paying rent and getting evicted are illegally discriminating based on the basis of race and sex. It’s the old disparate impact canard: “A housing provider that enforces a policy that denies the opportunity to rent to anyone who has an eviction filing or judgment is disproportionately denying housing to Black households and Black women in particular,” wrote HOPE Deputy Director Josefina Navar. Now, everyone knows why landlords don’t want to rent to people who have failed to pay rent in the past and gotten themselves evicted or forced the property’s owner to threaten eviction: landlords want to be paid what they’re owed, on time, without legal hassles and expense. That’s all.
Weekend Ethics Update, 7/29/2023: Navy Joan, “Payback,” Soccer Creeps, News Media Denial, UFOs, Trump’s Relationship With Jesus, And Hillary [Excellent Typo Fixed]
Talk about a “day that will live in infamy”: on this date in 1921, Adolf Hitler became the leader of the Nazi Party, aka the Nationalist Socialist German Workers’ Party. You know the rest.
I’ve been remiss in writing Warm-Ups and similar multiple issue posts: on a time/views basis, they are the least efficient use of my own limited blogging time, as they take about twice as long to prepare and attract about half as much attention as the single issue essays—don’t ask me why. But looking at my list, if I don’t give due attention to some of these backed-up stories now I may never get to them at all. Soooooooooo…
1. The Navy Joan saga, cont. As discussed here, President Biden officially made his son’s 5-year-old love-child Navy Joan Roberts, a non-person by refusing to count her among his grandchildren literally, as he told staff that they were to only acknowledge that he had six grandkids, not seven. This, despite his repeated paeans to family and his love of his grandchildren. This is a major indictment of Biden’s integrity, fairness, courage and character, and the majority of commentators, even some in the pro-Biden propaganda corps, were appropriately critical. Enough so, it seems, that Joe’s”s advisors decided that he had seven grandchildren after all.
President Biden publicly acknowledged his 4-year-old granddaughter, Navy Joan Roberts, for the first time yesterday, saying in a statement that he and the first lady, Jill Biden, “only want what is best for all of our grandchildren, including Navy.”
The reversal deserves no applause. His initial cruel handling of yet another situation created by his Black Sheep son was signature significance: decent people don’t act like that, ever. That he changed his position only after it appeared that his already miserable poll numbers might suffer is redolent of the disgusting machinations of Bill Clinton during the Lewinsky scandal, when a Dick Morris poll indicated that the public wouldn’t tolerate him lying about the affair. If you need a poll to tell you what conduct is unethical, then you’re hopeless ethically. Clinton was hopeless, and so is Biden.
Ethics Alarms 