U.S. Society

On The Trail Of The Great Stupid…

/ Jack Marshall / 10 Comments

These signs were allegedly posted yesterday in response to the Supreme Court’s hay trick yesterday. If genuine—and who knows?—‘s staff the owner of the establishment is a medical miracle, apparently living without a brain. As simultaneous virtue-signaling and IQ 80 signaling, this is special. Let’s see: the Supreme Court did not rule that businesses can discriminate. How will the store’s staff identify “Trump supporters”? How often does a church walk in a store to buy anything? Do churches even fly flags? I’ve never seen one.

Bias makes you stupid, but it can’t make someone this stupid unless he or she is well on the way already.

Celebrities Abusing Free Speech, Case # 708,666,213,45 (Since 2017): WNBA Player Natasha Cloud

/ Jack Marshall / 11 Comments

(Of course, the number in the title above is just an estimate. It might be more.)

The first ethics problem with celebrities mouthing off in public about matters they know nothing about is that they have an undeservedly out-sized metaphorical megaphone. The second problem is that foolish adults and immature kids think that someone being rich and famous means that that they possess special skills and powers of perception beyond whatever expertise it was that made them that way. It’s the “they must be smarter than I am, because they’re richer/more famous/more successful than I am” fallacy. The third problem is that so many celebrities in this category believe their own hype, and really do think their opinion is more valid than the average guy on a bar stool.

The fourth ethics problem is that the news media reports what these Dunning-Kruger Syndrome victims say, which is the journalistic equivalent of spraying deadly viruses via aerosol cans in a crowded stadium.

Today’s example of this ugly, persistent, and probably unpreventable phenomenon is the WNBA Washington Mystics Natasha Cloud, who is generously called a “star” in most reports. (She’s averaged 7.5 points a game.) I question whether any WNBA player qualifies as a star, but that’s just me.) She’s been shooting off her mouth since May, when she told the Philadelphia Inquirer :

Continue reading →

The Affirmative Action Demise Freakout

/ Jack Marshall / 9 Comments

In some respects the Left’s reaction to Students For Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College is more disturbing, if less hysterical, than its response to the elimination of Roe v. Wade. The near complete disregard for Constitution and the principles it represents being displayed is stunning, and a warning. Robert Kennedy, Jr., who may be a wacko regarding vaccinations but who is as about as representative of the current state of the Democratic Party and Woke World as an individual can be, was usefully specific, tweeting,

“Regarding the Supreme Court banning affirmative action in higher ed — I know many Americans feel that purely race-based decisions are unfair. However, this feeling misses important context. The effects of racist policies going back centuries are now self-perpetuating. Affirmative action understands this and uses race-based policies to undo the effects of racist policies. ‘Color-blind’ admissions tend to favor those who are already in the circle of privilege. It favors those who grew up in affluent, educated households. Wouldn’t you like to invite in those who have been left out in the cold?”

And there it is. “It’s  okay, in fact the right thing to do, to deliberately violate the Constitution and ignore U.S. law if it serves ‘the greater good’ and our judgment regarding the needs of social justice.” That has become the entire operating philosophy of the Democrats. It can be seen as one that would open the door to unlimited totalitarian abuses. This is why the First, Second and Sixth Amendments, the Equal Protection Clause, Due Process and the entire Constitution itself are under sustained attack to undermine it in the eyes of an ignorant public we allowed to grow to adulthood without ever being adequately educated about the importance of the Founding documents. Bobby Jr. explains: if Constitutional restrictions favor the “wrong” people, then to hell with the Constitution. The direct line from his reasoning to government censorship of speech should be obvious (but since the news media won’t draw that line, or is too inept to do so clearly, it won’t be to the dim Americans who need to see it most.

RFKJ’s last argument, “Wouldn’t you like to invite in those who have been left out in the cold?” is a another classic hide-the-ball, bury-the-lede, “its isn’t what it is” con. He is really asking the tribal interests that support his party, “Wouldn’t you like to have a fist on the scales giving your race/ethnicity/sex a permanent advantage in everything you do?

We should be grateful to Kennedy for being comparatively honest. President Biden, who hasn’t read the decision, had the gall to say, “This isn’t a normal Court,” again darkly suggesting malign intent—from its enforcement of the Constitution, its duty. Journalists and pundits are giving us a vivid picture of what we can expect in the upcoming election campaign with deceptive, misleading or written-for-morons headlines like:

Continue reading →

This Is How The Dean Of Berkeley Law School Teaches Ethics To His Students…

/ Jack Marshall / 4 Comments

Nice. Violate the law, ignore basic fairness, and honesty, but as long as you don’t tell anyone and can’t be caught, it’s okay.

Chemerinsky is a well-established partisan hack whose legal commentary is almost always polluted by his leftist agenda, but this was low even for him. Do you ever wonder where unethical lawyers come from?

Classes like his.

And professors like him. Yale Law School’s Dean, Georgetown Law Center’s Dean, and others supposedly overseeing the training of tomorrow’s legal professionals have similarly made it clear with their actions and words that ethics are secondary to their political and social agendas. None have done so quite as flagrantly and smugly as Chemerinsky, however.

From The Pro-Abortion Side, An “It Isn’t What It Is” Spectacular!

/ Jack Marshall / 18 Comments

The advocacy for abortion has always relied heavily on Rationalization #64, “Yoo’s Rationalization” or “It isn’t what it is;” indeed abortion is one of the unethical tactic’s most prominent domains. For abortion isn’t a matter of “choice,” but rather a controversy over when and to what extent society should tolerate the killing of one human being (or millions) for the benefit of another. Calling the issue “a woman’s choice” is deliberate obfuscation.

Democratic Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut—and I will wrestle my hands to the floor to avoid typing some obvious and well-deserved characterizations of the woman—recently made the head-exploding argument that abortion was squarely supported by the moral teachings of the Catholic Church.

No, she really did. I’m not making this up! This was stated on social media by an elected official who is obligated to uphold the public trust. Here’s Rose:

Continue reading →

From The “Res Ipsa Loquitur” Files

/ Jack Marshall / 22 Comments

Analyzing this would be like shooting dead fish in a barrel, but by all means, go ahead if you want to.

Ethics Quote Of The Month: John W. Jenkins

/ Jack Marshall / 21 Comments

“The University defends the truth,” says the Harvard logo. ‘The emblem shows respect for science, using only verified facts within the University’s walls and a willingness to defend the truth.’ Yet as it relates to climate change, the University has set aside obvious truths and brought together its five professional schools supporting the new “Save the Planet” religious dogma of the past decade.”

—Harvard M.B.A John W. Jenkins, in a letter to the alumni magazine protesting the University’s complicity in promoting “imprudent policies perpetuated on our populations by Green environmental activists whose view of history is only 20 years deep.”

Jenkins, whom I have thus far not succeeded in contacting, has authored one of the clearest and most persuasive debunking of current climatic change cant, and perfectly chastised our mutual alma mater, Harvard, for its cowardly and irresponsible alliance with an unethical and destructive movement. The author appears to be in his late eighties, and more skilled in communication than graduates half, indeed a quarter his age.

Harvard Magazine published his letter, but I am trying hard to believe it was a coincidence that its second half was difficult to locate due to a pagination error. I hope Mr. Jenkins does not mind Ethics Alarms re-publishing his entire statement. It deserves to be seen by as many people as possible. The whole thing is an Ethics Quote of the Month. Here it is:

Continue reading →

Regarding Justice Alito’s “Appearance Of Impropriety” Scandal

/ Jack Marshall / 1 Comment

Justice Samuel Alito did not disclose a 2008 trip on the private jet of Paul Singer, a billionaire GOP donor, and did not recuse himself from a later case involving Singer’s hedge fund. Since the Supreme Court is now under a sustained attack by Democrats and progressives, partially because of the Dobbs ruling (How dare unelected judges rule that unelected judges shouldn’t decide matters the Constitution leaves to legislators?) and partially because they see the current conservative-leaning Court as its greatest roadblock to a socialist, quasi-totalitarian Nirvana, his best, most responsible and most ethical course was to admit he made a mistake, show that he understood the public’s concern, and vow to be more mindful of his conduct going forward.

Instead, Alito penned a Wall Street Journal op-ed defending his indefensible conduct,  declaring himself as innocent as a newborn lamb, and, of course, making things worse. His piece was full of legalistic hair-splitting to explain why he was well-within the requirements of the Ethics in Government Act, but the universal ethics requirement that judges must avoid the appearance of impropriety does not rest upon legal niceties. It rests upon how the public perceives things, and most of the public can’t read a statute and don’t read court opinions.

Continue reading →

Baseball Ethics: Everything Isn’t About Race, Kurt

/ Jack Marshall / 9 Comments

Kurt Streeter is allegedly the New York Times; primary sports pundit, but if he has written more than a handful of columns that didn’t drag race into his commentary, I’d be surprised. Most sports fans would be happy never to have to think about the obsessions of partisans and social justice warriors while following their favorite teams and athletes, but it is the mission of activists posing as sports analysts to have that hope a pipe dream.

In his latest column, Streeter marvels at Luis Arraez, a Miami Marlins infielder and last year’s American League batting champion, who is making the first plausible run at a season-long .400 average since George Brett came close (.390) in 1980. Arraez, who makes the softest contact in the Major Leagues and might best be compared to “Wee” Willie Keeler, a 19th Century star known for poking baseballs “where they ain’t,” is a fun story this season, but Streeter being Streeter, he must examine Arraez through a racial lens. “No player,” Streeter informs us portentously, “has ever finished a season batting at or above .400 since Major League Baseball became an integrated game.”

Ah! I get it: Streeter is saying that all those other.400 seasons by white players aren’t really legit, because they didn’t have to face all the great black pitchers who were being kept out of the game by racism. In this he includes Ted Williams, the last .400 hitter (.406 in 1941), just a bit short of Babe Ruth as the greatest hitter in MLB history, implying that if “Teddy Ballgame” was playing in a fair league, he might not have hit .400 at all.

The contention can’t be proved or disproved, of course, but this is the second time in a week I’ve heard the argument and it is illogical and offensive. Consider:

Continue reading →