Ethics Dunce (Again): Snopes (Again), And A Related Mystery

/ Jack Marshall / 4 Comments

Snopes, the once-trendy and amusing “Urban Myths” website that morphed quite a while ago into an almost comical Democratic party shill, may have hit peak Poe’s Law status (that’s PPL for short, like in the Barbra Streisand song) this time. I last moved these hacks out of my Julie Principle corner in June after somebody made the executive decision that the Axis site needed more ammunition when someone accused their political factchecks of partisan hackery. That month Snopes decided to point out that “No, Trump Did Not Call Neo-Nazis and White Supremacists ‘Very Fine People” after ignoring this Big Lie used repeatedly by Democrats for seven long years.

Snopes needn’t have bothered if it was going to stoop to new depths of outrageous bias as it did in a post last week. Climbing on the disgraceful bandwagon of the Trump Deranged who called Elon Musk’s awkward arm gesture as he signified that his “heart went out” to his fans a “Nazi salute,” it gave us “No, These Politicians Did Not Make the Same Gesture as Elon Musk.” A short summary of its intended message: “Apologists for Trump acolyte Musk who found photos of Democrats who also appeared to make a Nazi Salute in photos taken out of context are passing along misinformation, because the Democrats (Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris) are not Nazis, but Elon Musk, because he supports Donald Trump, might be.”

The post could be a Babylon Bee satire on Snopes (which has “factchecked” some of its satire). In truth, Musk’s gesture was exactly like the non-Nazi salutes of the Democrats Snopes always rushes to defend, because he also wasn’t giving a Nazi salute, as any non-Musk-hating, non-Trump Deranged, rational human being with a semi-functioning brain should be able to figure out all by themselves.

Continue reading →

Monday Morning Trump Presidency First Week Ethics Update

/ Jack Marshall / 19 Comments

1. A norm is born! In November, I wrote again about Harvard’s unethical and dishonest propagandists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt after earlier pronouncing them Academic Ethics Villains. “These two favorites of the New York Times are substantially responsible for the Axis of Unethical Conduct‘s Big Lie #6: “Trump’s Defiance Of Norms Is A Threat To Democracy,” a cornerstone of the Harris Campaign’s desperate “Trump is Hitler” strategy. They had just issued another one of their fear-mongering and academically indefensible Times op-eds, banging that same metaphorical drum with their (profitable!) argument that any genuine student of Presidential history (like they claim to be) knows is 100% hooey, and using the beat to argue for Democrats taking unprecedented measures to block Trump from the presidency….all of which defy previous democratic norms! The Levitsky and  Ziblatt hypocrisy has nonetheless become, apparently, a standard weapon for the Axis to use against Trump, as increasingly absurd as it.”

Trump, like all functioning Presidents who understand the office, creates new “norms.” (Fortunately, the Joe Biden innovation of the President being a hollow shell maneuvered by hidden hands does not look like it will become a norm.) During Trump’s first term, he created a norm by using social media to make the case for his own leadership while competing with the Axis news media’s efforts to debase him. Such direct contact with the public hearkened back to the days of FDR’s “fireside chats” on the radio. Trump is no Roosevelt, and his often hasty tweets in ALL CAPS often did more damage than good. Still, the use of social media as an unfiltered means of reaching the public without the spin of media partisans is destined to become standard operating procedure, at least for President bold enough to do it, and not delegate their social media accounst to 20-something nerds. Now, thanks to artificial intelligence bots. Trump, or any President, can create his (or her) own political cartoons via the meme-maker function, and get more circulation via social media than most news sources can give to outdated hacks like the self-righteous ex-WaPo cartoonist discussed here.

The viral “Trump as bad-ass gangster” meme above, following nicely on the “Melania as gangster” talk around her flashy Inauguration fashion statement, also guarantees that “FAFO” will enter the lexicon beyond its Gen X origins. FAFO is short for “Fuck around and find out,” or, in Tony Barretta’s words, “Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time”…. or, in my father’s generation’s words, “Actions have consequences.”

Continue reading →

Pundit Malpractice, Part II: A Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Masterpiece From “The Hill”

/ Jack Marshall / 4 Comments

This is truly a “Hold my beer!” moment to savor from “The Hill.” David Brooks’ fake history lesson, draped in his usual smarty-pants rhetoric, was unforgivable, but The Hill’s opinion piece with the click-bait title, “Blue Alert: Why Democrats are poised to win in 2028 and 2032” is so silly, lazy and idiotic that even Brooks gets leave to make fun of it.

Authored by GOP operatives Gary D. Alexander and Rick Cunningham, the thing makes it crystal clear how the Republican Party got the moniker “The Stupid Party” if it pays for advice from people capable of writing such junk. To state the obvious, Democrats aren’t “poised” to do anything at this point. The party has no leader; its President just exited the White House with one of the worst six months in Presidential annals; its Senators made asses of themselves in the hearings on Trump’s nominees so far, and its House members have declared themselves fans of biological men spiking volleyballs that crush women’s faces and illegal aliens who rape and kill. Its DEI Presidential candidate ran an embarrassing campaign while the party’s platform became “Abort more babies” and “Having a rally in Madison Square Garden proves Trump is Hitler.” Poised? Poisoned is more like it.

The article flags itself as bonkers by the third sentence, asserting that Democrats were already in an advantageous position to win in 2032. That’s eight years from now: I’m going to forgo the amusing but needless exercise of pointing out how unpredictable American political fortunes have been even two years in the future for most of our history. In eight years, the little fifth grade girl next door will be on the pill and registered to vote. Ah, but these two swamis write that their entrails readings “are deeply rooted in history and strategic realities.” You know, like Brooks’ one-term Presidents proving that populism doesn’t work.

Let’s examine these “realities”:

Continue reading →

Pundit Malpractice, Part I: David Brooks, Making The Public More Ignorant About History Than They Already Are

/ Jack Marshall / 7 Comments

What excuse does David Brooks have for publishing manifestly false Presidential history as part of the usual New York Times anti-Trump propaganda? None that I can see. He styles himself as a thoughtful public intellectual. He majored in history at Columbia. Okay, he is Canadian but he lives here and is presented by the New York Times as an authority.

I have to presume that if he writes a column with flat-out false information about U.S. political history, he is misleading the public intentionally or, just as unethically, he didn’t check his facts. Of course the New York Times editors don’t hold him to being factual, responsible or ethical. They let Charles M. Blow, Michelle Goldberg and their other biased hacks get away with worse most days. But I expect them to lie. I expect Brooks to be wrong, but at least to get his facts right.

Nope.

In the obnoxiously headlined “How Trump Will Fail,” Brooks tells us that “Trump has gone all 19th century on us. He seems to find in this period everything he likes: tariffs, Manifest Destiny, seizing land from weaker nations, mercantilism, railroads, manufacturing and populism.” At least he hasn’t embraced the version of America pushed by the Biden Administration: open borders, government censorship, racial discrimination, political prosecutions, puppet Presidencies and government cover-up journalism. The main thrust of Brooks’ analysis is that “populism” doesn’t work and has never worked in the U.S.. Brooks’ sneer at the American values of individualism, personal responsibility, exploration, confidence, exceptionalism and capitalism is palpable.

Continue reading →

Of Hollywood Hubris, Bait and Switch and Flat Learning Curves: Just What We Need, a Woke “Gone With The Wind” With Space Invaders

/ Jack Marshall / 14 Comments

I don’t know, Dana, I really don’t.

I have no idea what’s going on here. On a website called “Gone With The Wind (2025)” we get puffy blather about a stirring, high budget re-make of the politically incorrect classic, still the most successful movie of all time, ready to open at the end of 2025. It stars black Scarlett (Zendaya) and a black Rhett Butler (John Boyega). The site does not permit copying or screen shots. The director is Barry Jenkins, whose output so far has been only stories about social justice, racism, and black protagonists. The site’s description, however, tells us that this is a “Gone With The Wind” remake that will bring “fresh perspectives and contemporary sensibilities (oh-oh!) to this “modern adaptation.”

Although the web page is headlined “Gone With The Wind” (2025) Official Trailer, no trailer to the new film is on it. Several versions of the trailer for the original 1939 version are there to see, however.

Puzzled, I searched for a trailer for “Gone With The Wind” (2025), and got …

…. the trailer for “Gone With The Wind : Invasion!” Is that really a movie? Is it a spoof? Is the website a tease (that is, unethical fake or hoax) that pretends the new film is a remake? And what the hell is this:

Please rank in order of commercial viability: A GWTW starring Leonardo DiCaprio as Rhett and Megan Fox as Scarlet, a woke remake, and one with invading aliens. It’s a tough assignment.

I would normally assume that no one in Hollywood is so stupid as to make a woke update of “Gone With The Wind,” but then there were recent re-makes of “The Ten Commandments” and “Ben-Hur,” both of which bombed like the siege of Vicksburg. I assume that there are enough stupid people in Hollywood to make a science fiction version, since they got away with “Cowboys and Aliens” (barely) starring Daniel Craig and Harrison Ford in 2011.

Whatever is going on, it’s wrong.

Comment of the Day: “Justice for the Nicholas Brothers” [UPDATED]

/ Jack Marshall / 7 Comments

This was another dreary Saturday (almost all Saturdays have been dreary since Grace died, to be honest) until Ethics Alarms provided a triple treat. A new commenter debuted with a Comment of the Day, and I always love that. Better yet, the comment arrived on an old post, one from July of 2012. I also love that, as it shows that these poor rhetorical exercises with too many typos don’t always vanish like random pebbles thrown into the surf, but sometimes provide amusement and perspective to readers months and even years later, giving hope that my existence has some meaning after all.

Best of all, however, is that Kevin Hall’s Comment of the Day focuses much deserved attention on the amazing Nicholas Brothers, probably the greatest tap dancers who ever lived, whose memory is tragically faint because of the racism that restricted their careers. That number above, from a film that was seen almost exclusively by black audiences when it was released, is perhaps the most famous film performance by Harold and Fayard Nicholas, and it is certainly characteristic of their amazing style, but there are others. There is also a website dedicated to their lives and artistry. I feel about the Nicholas Brothers a bit like King Arthur does about the legend of Camelot as he expresses it in the final song in that Lerner and Lowe musical…

Ask every person if he’s heard the story
And tell it strong and clear if he has not…

Here is Kevin Hall’s Comment of the Day on the post, “Justice for the Nicholas Brothers.” I can’t resist some brief comments at the end…

Continue reading →

Fake Ethics Hero: Pamela Hemphill, A.K.A. “MAGA Granny”

/ Jack Marshall / 2 Comments

Does anyone say “Color me X” any more? Oh hell, I don’t care: Color me unimpressed with “MAGA Granny” rejecting her pardon from President Trump for her role in the January 6 Capitol riot that was the worst thing to happen to the United States since 9-11. Or Pearl Harbor. Or the Civil War.

She’s the retired 72-year-old drug and alcohol counselor from Boise, Idaho who pleaded guilty in January 2022 to a misdemeanor for entering the Capitol during the riot and was sentenced to 60 days in prison and three years of probation. She was one of those “rioters” who was basically walking around. The Axis media is singing her praises because she announced that she says won’t accept the pardon.

Hemphill said in an interview this week that she was turning President Trump’s gift down. “It’s an insult to the Capitol Police, to the rule of law and to the nation,” she said. “If I accept a pardon, I’m continuing their propaganda, their gaslighting and all their falsehoods they’re putting out there about Jan. 6.” She now says she doesn’t support Trump or (in the words of the New York Times) “believes his lie that the 2020 election was stolen.” (For the thousandth time, that is not a lie but an opinion that cannot be proven or disproven). A therapist had helped her change her view of the episode, you see. Now she realizes, she says, that the “Stop the Steal” movement. “was a cult, and I was in a cult.”

Winston Smith knows just how she feels.

I wonder if that therapist put a cage of hungry rats on her face to prompt Pam’s epiphany?

Continue reading →

From the Res Ipsa Loquitur Files: Leadership vs. Bureaucracy

/ Jack Marshall / 11 Comments

Here is an example of what is being discussed, from January 15:

A poll that I saw this morning (and that had mysteriously vanished when I looked for it just now) found that 43% of Los Angeles citizens would consider looking to the Republican Party for future leadership. That was considered significant in a city with only 18% of its residents identifying themselves as Republicans. I thought the amazing finding in the poll was that 48% still say they would only vote for more Democrats.

The Hegseth Confirmation, and Great Moments in Ethics Estoppel: The Concern That New DOD Sec. Hegseth Won’t Be Ready “24-7”

/ Jack Marshall / 22 Comments

I probably wouldn’t have voted for Pete Hegseth to be Trump’s DOD Secretary; certainly not until he answered a lot of crucial questions he never was asked. He should have been grilled about the extent of his management, oversight and negotiation experience, but the Democrats, because they have no principles, decided to use the Kavanaugh strategy to slime him (because that worked so well the first time).

Hegseth is easily the worst of Trump’s major appointments, and the fact that he was confirmed last night (by the narrowest margin possible) demonstrates that the terror expressed by the Trump Deranged that unlike last time around, the Republicans in Congress are inclined to help their party’s President achieve his goals rather than obstruct them is justified. (To that, my reaction is “Tough. You have nobody but your own party to blame, along with people like you who enabled and supported an arrogant, incompetent, corrupt, untrustworthy, and increasingly totalitarianism-embracing government.”)

This morning I decided to surf between MSNBC and CNN to hear the screams of the Axis propagandists who hang out there [Oh NOOO! ICE is really arresting illegals! Oh NOOO! Trump is making villains like Anthony Fauci pay for their own security details! Oh NOOO! Trump is killing DEI!] When they weren’t screaming about all of that, they were indignant that someone was now leading the Pentagon who could not be trusted to be ready for a crisis phone call every hour of the day, 365 days a year. These assorted partisan hacks and the Democratic party “contributors” who joined in their self-righteous lament are ethically estopped from making that complaint about Hegseth.

Continue reading →

Awww, Some Law School Seniors Just Had Their Job Offers Revoked By That Mean President Trump

/ Jack Marshall / 5 Comments

The New York Times and other sources are weeping with the dozens of recent law school graduates whose job offers were rescinded by the Justice Department after the students thought they were about to begin entry-level positions in its antitrust, criminal, civil rights, immigration and national security divisions, and at the F.B.I. This is another good example of how the Times cannot help itself from spinning and editorializing in a partisan manner even the most straightforward story. “The offers were made through the Attorney General’s Honors Program,” sayeth the Times, “which has functioned without controversy,” for decades, it says. See? This is so unfair! Except the fact that something has avoided controversy doesn’t mean it should be free from change, reform, or even elimination. “The program appears to be the latest target of Trump political appointees intent on reversing even the most workaday decisions made by their predecessors,” sniffs the paper. Oooh, these were political appointees who obviously don’t understand a good program when they see one. And those MAGA Nazis want to mess with harmless, innocent, inconsequential “workaday” decisions! (Pssst! Hiring lawyers is never a “workaday” decision, or shouldn’t be, even in the Justice Department.)

Continue reading →