What was Whoopie saying in this clip as she tried to explain why Biden pardoning Hunter is defensible? Start it at the 10 minute mark: do NOT watch the whole thing because it will lower your IQ by 20 points.

In honor of the great Ralph Kramden (Jackie Gleason), who when caught with the undeniable evidence of his own lies or misconduct, stammered uselessly (on “The Honeymooners”) “Huminahuminahumina….” Ethics Alarms, on this date, December 2, 2024, hereby creates “The Grand Huminahumina,” which will be henceforth awarded to the public figure who best emulates poor Ralph by babbling incoherently under pressure.

One note in defense of Whoopie: she’s technically correct that breaking a promise isn’t technically a lie, unless it can be proven that the promise-breaker intended to break the promise when he or she made it. Breaking a promise is a breach of integrity and trust, but not necessarily honesty.

It is just as unethical as lying, however, unless conditions have materially changed since the promise was made. In the case of the Bidens, they have not.

Brooks’ featured reaction is much, much more unethical than #1. After all, Gaffigan is only a stand-up comic (and a pretty decent actor), and carries no authority with his opinions. Brooks, however, does, although after he accepted and ran with his lucrative job as a Times fake conservative (the technical term is “sell-out”), he shouldn’t.

The latest evidence of Brooks’ pompous advocacy of nonsense was on the PBS News Hour, where he for some reason shares a show with knee-jerk, race-baiting progressive hack Jonathan Capehart. I guess because Capeheart is a black, gay progressive hack while Brooks is a white, heterosexual, under-cover progressive hack, this is what NPR regards as “balance.” Here was Brooks’ pronouncement regarding what Democrats have to do in the wake of Trump’s re-ascension to the White House. As with the previous installment, I’ll have some comments.

Continue reading →

This is the day before my birthday, once a relatively welcome event, now taboo, as December 1 was the day I found my wonderful father dead in his favorite chair after he died in his sleep at the age of 89. I can’t shake the sense that my father’s exit from the world was of more import than my entering it, though I know he would disagree. My sister has convinced me to let her tale me to see “Wicked” tomorrow evening, which will be the first movie I have seen in a theater since 2019. I consider this excursion ethics research and an obligation of cultural literacy. Is the film “woke”? Is it another Hollywood propaganda effort but one that is subtle enough not to alienate audiences, like Disney’s recent output? Are conservative critics just seeing the movie through jaundiced eyes? Are there any songs in the show that are genuinely memorable, unlike the songs in virtually every other Broadway hit musical since “Les Miz”?

As was pointed out by commenter John Paul here, the film version of “Wicked” has an unethical title, as it is in fact only the first act of the musical despite clocking in at over 150 minutes, almost as long as the stage show. There will be a “Wicked” Part 2 for sure: if the film had tanked, it would have been quietly cancelled, like the the planned second installment of “The Golden Compass” and the promised sequel to “Silverado.”

Now ponder this deranged NYT comment on a Times story about the film:

Yikes. Yeah, a musical spin-off of “The Wizard of Oz” would have overcome the epic incompetence of the Harris campaign if only it had been released earlier. That may be the wackiest excuse for Trump’s win yet.

Meanwhile…

Continue reading →

I re-watched “White Christmas” last night in preparation for this year’s posting of my annual guide to the film, which will show up here some time in the next few weeks. I noticed quite a few details that I missed in previous viewings, including the material for a terrific (and tough!) trivia question that I have never seen posed before. Ready?

What 1930s film star appeared in both “It’s a Wonderful Life” and “White Christmas”?

Thank you, Crime Prevention Research Center, John R. Lott Jr, and RealClearInvestigations. But what took you so long?

This ridiculous-on-its-face fake statistic started being prominently wielded by Democrats and progressives in 2024: “Statistics show that [“immigrants”/”undocumented aliens”/”migrants”] are less likely to commit crimes than American citizens.” Fortunately, for a statistic that sounded dubious from the second it was first claimed, the rationalization was unpersuasive even if it had been true. Ethics Alarms swatted this intellectually dishonest talking point away several times, pointing out that crimes committed by individuals here illegally should never have been committed at all because the perpetrators should never have been in a position to commit them. Such crimes are all the direct result of U.S. government negligence, incompetence, or deliberate failure to enforce existing immigration laws. A single murder, rape or other crime committed by an illegal immigrant is still one too many, and inexcusable.

Continue reading →

https://twitter.com/i/status/1861766333160993165

Why is this unethical? Let me count the ways…

1. It is grandstanding and virtue-signaling without purpose.

2. It demeans women. This is the kind of stereotypical, weak, emotional female behavior that causes biases to linger. I am constantly irritated at movies and TV shows that depitctwomen screaming like little girls if they see a dead body or witness some other traumatic event. I never heard my mother scream; I don’t think she ever did. I’ve never heard my sister scream. My late wife screamed exactly once in our 43 years of marriage, when she saw her cat in the jaws of a stray dog on our porch. Screaming over the results of an election is the mark of, if not mental illness, serious arrested adolescence.

3. The stunt makes progressives look incompetent, desperate and untrustworthy. They may be all of these things, but it is the duty of members of any group not to bring disrepute and ridicule down on other members.

4. Being proud of Trump Derangement shows a distinct distortion of values, such as proportion, prudence, dignity and responsibility.

Is it possible that this was done entirely as satire? If so, the stunt failed spectacularly, because no one seems to have seen it that way.