Ethics Alarms Generally Ignores Michael Moore But a Quote This Unethical and Cretinous Warrants an Exception…

“Who’s really being removed by ICE tonight? The child who would’ve discovered the cure for cancer in 2046? The 9th grade nerd who would’ve stopped that asteroid that’s gonna hit us in 2032? Do we care?”

Yes, activist communist and has-been documentary-maker Michael Moore really and truly made that head-explodingly stupid argument, my candidate for the most ridiculous rationalization for allowing illegal immigrants into the U.S. yet, even topping the “But that poem on the Statue of Liberty!” excuse.

It is so stupid that the theory would be a valuable diagnostic tool on IQ tests. If someone checks the “Sounds good to me!” box, that test-taker’s cognitive ability should automatically be judged as “dangerously impaired.”

As we have explained here many times, consequentialism is the ethical theory for dolts, the concept that a decision or action is right or wrong depending on what happens as a result of it. Moore is saying that an action is unethical or wrong if anything good might have happen if a different choice had be made. I hesitate to give this walking, talking ethics corrupter credit, but he just has to be smarter than to believe that. As usual, Moore is trying to con the dimmer members of the public, a large contingent among Americans who still pay attention to him.

One wag on social media responded to Moore’s insulting question with “Now do abortion.”

Bingo.

Trump’s Pete Rose Pardon: Not the Most Unethical Pardon, Just the Dumbest

Above you see the President with a photo of the late, great, baseball slimeball doing the Nazi salute like Elon Musk, which I’m sure is what endears him to Trump.

Kidding!

Not kidding: between their various pardons, I’m pretty sure Presidents Biden and Trump have so degraded the status of the Presidential clemency power that it will never recover. Once, such pardons conveyed ethical values and legitimate justifications for a President’s compassion. This thobbingly stupid pardon should make the gesture an embarrassment forevermore.

Here is the President’s asinine, even by his standards, Truth Social post:

Ugh. Fisking this crap is too easy but noxious, like shooting dead rats in a barrel…

Continue reading

Gee What a Surprise: NOAA “Adjusts” Its Historical Weather Data Just As “Climate Change Deniers” Claim They Do

Of course, the corrupt news media sees no problem with this. As ABC helpfully points out, NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information “adjusts weather data to account for factors like instrument changes, station relocation and urbanization, and it does so through peer-reviewed studies that are published publicly through its federal website.”

And factors like the need for climate scientists to show that the climate change apocalypse that they constantly predict for us is based on convincing data, when in fact it is based on flawed data, as the scientists admit once you cut through the jargon. For example, traditional glass thermometers have been replaced with more precise digital sensors warranting “adjustments” to accurately compare readings between the two instruments. Sea surface temperatures used to be taken manually from a bucket off of a boat, unlike the network of buoys and satellites that are used to gauge water temperatures today. Then there is the “urban heat island effect”: Cities heat up more than rural areas due to human activity, infrastructure and the concentration of buildings, roads and other heat-absorbing materials, causing higher temperatures in cities compared to surrounding areas. This can distort temperature data, making an area appear hotter than it is. So the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration makes adjustments to account for that too.

Continue reading

Can Shattered Trust Be Restored? Should it?

Last September I wrote about minor league catcher Derek Bender. He was playing for the Fort Myers Mighty Mussels, the Minnesota Twins’ Low-A affiliate, and was accused after a game of tipping off several hitters for the Lakeland Flying Tigers, a Detroit farm team, regarding the next pitches the Mighty Mussels pitcher was going to throw. Lakeland scored four runs in the second inning to win the game 6-0 and win the Florida State League West division, eliminating the Mighty Mussels from playoff contention.

Lakeland’s coaches alerted Fort Myers coaches regarding Bender’s alleged pitch tipping, and the fact that Bender had told several teammates that he was exhausted and wanted the season to be over was sufficient to convince the organization that Bender had deliberately lost the game for his own team.

The Twins released him. Despite his previous status as a high-rated prospect, the catcher is now a pariah in the game. MLB’s investigation has not been completed, though news stories last fall stated his pitch-tipping as fact. Bender’s agency representing him advised him to make no public statements until there was official report. That seems to have been bad advice: the belief that the player cheated to cause his own team to lose has taken hold as the accepted narrative.

Now he has given an extensive interview to The Athletic, the New York Times sports publication. He says he is innocent of the accusations. Bender met with investigators in November, going over the fateful inning pitch-by-pitch to prove that he was innocent. If the report concludes he did tip off opposing batters to his pitcher’s pitchers, Bender’s baseball career is almost certainly doomed.

Continue reading

Ethics Dunce: Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy (and Further Observations on the Oval Office Fiasco) [Expanded]

I worked for many years for a fascinating man, a brilliant negotiation specialist and consultant, Richard Halpern. My first thought yesterday after watching the astounding argument that broke out among the President, Vice-President Vance and Ukrainian president Zelenskyy was, “Boy, I wish Rich was still here to analyze what went wrong.” Rich died in 2009, but I learned enough about the art of negotiation from working with and observing him to be confident in how he would have reacted to what occurred on live television yesterday. My thoughts also reached back across the decades to the seminar I took on negotiation in law school with Adrian Fisher, then Dean of Georgetown Law Center after a career as a top arms control negotiator for the United States.

Both Richard Halpern and Adrian Fisher would have agreed that Zelenskyy was incompetent. I would add that he behaved like a deluded fool who had come to believe his fawning press notices.

First, Zelenskyy did not sufficiently research his negotiation partners, their preferences, their character, and their “hot buttons” that should never be pressed without sound reasons. Second, he did not properly prepare to insulate his own hot buttons from making him behave against his country’s best interests. Third, he did not comprehend why he was in the Oval office and what was expected of him.

Finally, he did not understand that as a supplicant nation seeking critical aid from the United States, he was not on a level playing field, particularly since he was in the U.S., on the President’s home turf. His job was to be respectful, compliant and non-confrontational no matter what occurred or was said.

The previous press conference with a foreign leader that President Trump had completed just the day before should have served as a guide. Keir Starmer was content to stay in the background and barely speak while the President rambled on in his inimitable fashion, and Great Britain has accumulated far more credits and greater good will with the U.S. than Ukraine. One commenter said that yesterday Zelenskyy failed to “read the room.” It was far worse than that: he failed to read the room, whom he was talking to, why he was there, and what he had to accomplish.

Continue reading

MORE From The Res Ipsa Loquitur Files: White Mother, Black Baby

Several times in the past I have cited the famous case of the severed toe in the plug of tobacco. It stands for the proposition that certain occurrences are so clearly a result of unforgivable human error that no further evidence is needed. This is the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, “The thing speaks for itself.” The Mississippi Supreme Court stated that try as it might, it could “imagine no reason why, with ordinary care human toes could not be left out of chewing tobacco, and if toes are found in chewing tobacco, it seems to us that somebody has been very careless.” I’m confident that those judges would have come to the same conclusion in the case of the botched IVF procedure that ended up with a mother giving birth to another couple’s baby.

Someone was very careless….

Continue reading

Ethics Musings at a Memorial Service

I have been to more memorial events in the past year than in the previous ten. Today, on the day before the 365 day anniversary of my wife’s sudden death, I began with another, a “celebration of life” in a Baptist church for a woman I never met. But she was the mother of a friend, not a close friend, I guess— can someone you have only talked to twice in 30 years be called a close friend?—but a wonderful, kind, caring man whom I am proud to have as a friend at all.

I knew only three people at the service besides my friend, which surprised me. I spoke with two of them, and waved to another. Sitting alone in a long pew, my mind wandered all over the place on many topics—this is my curse. Is it unethical to be thinking about a different deceased person at a memorial for another one? No, thinking isn’t ethical unethical, but anyway, I couldn’t help replaying the events of the past year beginning with February 29, 2024 in my mind.

The service, though mercifully short, reminded me of Grace’s disillusionment with organized religion after growing up as Methodist minister’s daughter. The sermon was delivered by a friend of the family; itwas so generic as to be impersonal and meaningless, even though it was presented as particularly applicable to the deceased. The pastor basically repeated that “love is the way” over and over again for fifteen minutes.

Meanwhile, he soloist at the service seemed to think of herself as channeling Aretha Franklin, but had neither the voice nor, crucially, the pitch to approach that standard. She also was belting high, screachy notes into a harsh and overly-loud sound system that really and truly hurt my ears, but I felt it would have been bad form to cover them with my hands.

Furthermore:

Continue reading

From the Res Ipsa Loquitur Files…

Today is supposedly Great Stupid Day, or Throw a Tantrum Day, or something. One of my previously functioning lawyer friends on Facebook posted the nonsense below, saying that “we all” should follow its wisdom “if we can”:

Friday Open Forum!

There should be a lot to write about today that I have missed so far.

Meanwhile, the Hackman demise mystery is more confused now than when I posted on it yesterday. The theories are getting really wild now: last night I heard an “expert” speculate that Hackman and his wife had simultaneous heart attacks.

I think we can officially conclude that the Hackmans did not kill their dog as part of a grand, planned exit, because two of the couple’s dogs are alive and well. Well, good. The post was primarily about the unethical practice of euthanizing healthy dogs “out of love.” (No one has yet suggested that the dogs conspired to rub out their masters, but the way the speculation is going, that theory may surface yet.

I always feel terrible when any well-loved and respected public figure has a final act that is embarrassing, lurid, pathetic or ugly. Often this means that the mess is remembered for than what went before, which was what mattered.

Do write something memorable for me today.

From James Carville, a Rationalization #22 Classic, and Ethics Dunce Infamy

For some reason, the Axis media and social media pundits have been resorting to interviewing retired, apparently unemployed, old Clinton political consultant James Carville as he slowly transforms into Gollum and says “fuck” a lot. Virtually all political consultants are soulless, ethics-free Machiavellians who would sell out their own mothers out for a rich contract; the successful ones aren’t stupid (unlike the consultants Kamala Harris apparently paid millions to), but they usually have nothing to teach us about ethics except from the “Don’t be like them!” perspective. Remember how Dick Morris, another Clinton consultant, suggested that Bill commission a poll on whether he should tell the truth about Monica Lewinsky?

[Digression: In a recent interview on the same “Call Her Daddy” podcast that Kamala chose to submit to instead of Joe Rogan’s, poor (not being sarcastic: I feel sorry for her and always have) Monica Lewinsky said that the “right way” for President Clinton to have handled the revelation of their liaisons would have been either “to resign” or find a way not to make her a national pariah. “I think that the right way to handle a situation like that would have been to probably say it was nobody’s business and to resign,” Lewinsky said, “or to find a way of staying in office that was not lying and not throwing a young person who was just starting out in the world under the bus.”

Comment for Monica: “Welcome to the party, pal!” Yet you sat back and let Hillary Clinton campaign as a feminist Presidential candidate while the Democrats cynically cheered themselves as “the party of women.” My sympathy for you stretches only so far…]

Seldom, however, do these unethical mutations of humanity who call themselves consultants come right out and express exactly how warped they are, as Carville does in this video on Rumble. He says, speaking about the issue of biological women participating in women’s sports,

“If you feel like that you have to protect these girls from, I’m not sure what — I don’t really fucking understand it or give a shit, but it’s a big goddamn issue to you, so, you got to be sure that you’re out there and ready to go. And, you know, whenever this topic comes up, I say, ‘Look, I’m sorry. I just don’t think a lot about track meets. I think a lot about people having affordable health care. I think a lot about how we can grow America. I think a lot about that they’re not going to be able to pass a debt limit, not even close, much less reconciliation, anything else.”

Nice. Women and girls losing to biological men in their athletic competitions, risking injuries, losing championships, scholarships and the experience of fairly run sports just isn’t as significant in the vast scheme of human events as the other concerns Carville mentions, so its not worth talking about or fixing.

That’s the essence of evil Rationalization #22, the worst on the list, which allows any conduct, no matter how harmful or wrong, to be brushed aside and rationalized away because “there are worse things.” From the description of #22. The Comparative Virtue Excuse: “There are worse thingsat the list,

“If ‘Everybody does it’ is the Golden Rationalization, this is the bottom of the barrel. Yet amazingly, the excuse is popular in high places. During the Iraq deabale in the Bush II administration, we heard the “Abu Ghraib was bad, but our soldiers would never cut off Nick Berg’s head!” argument. It is true that for most unethical misconduct, there are indeed “worse things.” Lying to your boss in order to goof off at the golf course isn’t as bad as stealing a ham, and stealing a ham is nothing compared selling military secrets to North Korea.”

You can try to excuse anything this way, and Carville’s favorite party is wearing out #22 of late. A particularly ridiculous extension of the rationalization was a recent Providence Journal story headlined,  “Numbers show RI undocumented immigrants a small slice of those getting benefits. What we know.

Reporter Katherine Gregg determined that Medicaid payments to those without Social Security numbers totaled $55.4 million last year, including the $16,106,050 paid to illegal immigrants. Then she shrugged off the wasted funds as just a tiny percentage of the Medicaid budget. This is apparently the Axis-ordered rebuttal for all of the Trump Administration spending cut efforts: why should we care about a few million or even a few billion here and there, while so much more is being wasted elsewhere?

Jeez, where’s Ben Franklin when you need him?

Carville’s #22 is even uglier because he frames it in human terms. Even though the invasion of trans men into women’s sports does measurable harm to identifiable children and adult athletes, puts girls and women at risk of injury, and savages a group that Carville’s party once pretended to care deeply about, it’s just not worth paying attention to because….health care is too expensive. His attitude can’t be justified as utilitarianism, because the integrity of women’s and girls’ sports isn’t part of a trade-off or a necessary sacrifice to achieve a greater good. It’s just not important enough, says Carville, to care about.

Yecchh.