Ethics Quiz: The Complimentary Dessert

/ Jack Marshall / 26 Comments

My friend had dinner recently with his wife to celebrate their 38th anniversary at the hotel that hosted their wedding reception. The staff at the restaurant made a big deal over them, and they also gorged on a six-course meal.

At the end of the dinner, the waiter offered them a dessert, compliments, of the house. My freind said that at that point he and his wife felt like Mr. Creosote from Monty Python’ “The Meaning of Life,” so they declined. But, he asked, would it have been unethical to accept the gift without planning on consuming it there, and to ask for a box to take it home?

Your Ethics Alarms Ethics Quiz of the Day is…

Would it?

Both my friend and I agreed that it would be crass and thus unethical to accept a gift intended to put an exclamation point on a celebratory meal only to wrap it up in a doggie bag. My mother, as I told him, would have accepted the offer in a heartbeat and asked for a box to accompany the dessert without any qualms at all. My sister, the metaphorical apple that doesn’t fall far from the tree, quickly took our late mother’s point of view when I asked her just now: free food is free food.

What do you think?

“THIS Is CNN!”..Also Incompetent Journalism, Punditry and Moderating

/ Jack Marshall / Leave a comment

“Sound and fury, signifying nothing.”

CNN host Abby Phillips deserved this. She deliberately rigged this segment, stacking it with anti-Trump Republicans ( Shermichael Singleton and the consistently idiotic, Dunning-Kruger victim Ana Navarro) for “balance” and, as usual, leaving token conservative Scott Jennings to hold up the Trump administration point of view all by himself.

The discussion was supposed to be about deporting illegal immigrants, not that there should be much left to discuss. The U.S. should deport as many as it can, as quickly and efficiently as it can, so potential border-jumpers get the message that they are not welcome. What is there to argue about?

That was not a group that could possibly enlighten anyone except maybe a special needs kindergarten class, and Phillips clearly has no moderation or leadership skills whatsoever. Thus the discussion deteriorated into a disgraceful, shouting, rationalization-filled, virtue-signalling brawl with nobody’s words being decipherable over the din, not that Navarro or Singleton are worth listening to anyway.

Ethics verdicts:

Navarro: Incompetent, of course. What does the status of Marco Rubio’s grandfather have to do with 2025 illegal immigration policy? This woman broadcasts her bias and lack of critical thinking skills every weekday on “The View”: why is she deemed fit to participate in any broadcast public policy discussion?

Singleton: Signature significance! “I’m black and you’re not!” Anyone who stoops to that playground-level retort even once should be banned from television permanently

Phillips: Incompetent and irresponsible. If you can’t moderate a discussion better than that (and she could have hardly done worse) you have no business hosting a show.

CNN: Incompetent and irresponsible. The network morphed into “The Jerry Springer Show” so gradually that I hadn’t noticed. If it were an ethical responsible, trustworthy network interested in public service (and we all know it is not), CNN would ban Navarro and Singleton permanently.

First May Open Forum, or “The Ethics That Bloom In the Spring (Tra-La)”

/ Jack Marshall / 16 Comments

Suddenly there are more stories and events of interest ethically than I can handle, so your contributions to the weekly free-for-all are even more needed than usual.

This is especially true because I am still picking bits of brain and skill off the walls, ceiling and computer screen after the jolt generating today’s first post.

So please, emote here early and often.

Where’s that Windex?

Post Script: That version of the famous song from Gilbert and Sullivan’s “The Mikado,” by the late, lamented D’Oyly Carte Opera Company in 1966 is 1) way, way too slow 2) exactly the kind of stodgy staging that killed the Victorian pair’s original production company and that gives G&S a bad reputation. I’ve played Ko-Ko in that number four times, and it should be a romp. (When I played the part in high school, I did an Adolf Hitler imitation in one of the encores…)

KABOOM! Well, My Head Just Exploded, and If You Read This, Yours Will Too…

/ Jack Marshall / 7 Comments

Unbelievable. Outrageous. Disgusting. Amazing.

And yet, oddly satisfying and welcome!

That “60 Minutes” segment on Kamala Harris in which CBS and the once-respected new magazine tried to influence the 2024 election by editing a Harris interview to make her seem like less of a babbling, intellectually-challenged fool — the subject of Trump’s $20 billion lawsuit against CBS — was nominated yesterday by Emmys for “outstanding edited interview.”

The revelation that the television industry approves of deceptive partisan propaganda that helps Democrats and advances progressive agendas isn’t the shocking aspect of the nomination. Anyone paying attention know that already. What is head-blowing is that the Emmys would be so open about its bias and rejection of ethics.

The nomination is a direct and flagrant gesture of defiance to President Trump. It is not merely political and partisan, but openly and intentionally political and partisan. Trump sued CBS for $20 billion as a result of this all-time low-point in fair, unbiased, and trustworthy journalism, and should have, if only to make sure the smoking gun “Nah, there’s no mainstream media bias!” episode wasn’t jammed in a metaphorical memory hole as the Axis media continues to pretend that it is interested in informing the American public rather than manipulating it.

Continue reading →

President Trump Sacks Waltz: Good

/ Jack Marshall / 10 Comments

From the New York Times: “President Trump is ousting his national security adviser, Michael Waltz, and another senior member of the White House’s foreign policy team, the first significant personnel overhaul of top aides in his second term, according to people familiar with the situation. Mr. Waltz had been on thin ice since he organized a group chat on the commercial messaging app Signal to discuss a sensitive military operation in Yemen and accidentally included a journalist in the conversation.”

Readers will recall that Ethics Alarms issued several posts about the Signal chat debacle, the first of which , on March 24, ended thusly: “This will be an early test of how serious the new administration is about accountability. Someone’s head should roll for this.”

Someone’s head has. It was one of the right heads, too.

Trump’s action is absolutely the ethical and competent course, and should remind everyone, including the lackeys of the news media, that the previous administration didn’t care about accountability, nor competence, performance or merit—just “historic” DEI appointments who could never be fired. President Biden didn’t fire anyone, despite presiding over one of the most inept administrations in U.S. history.

Of course, Presidents are supposed to be demanding and to fire screw-ups, so Trump deserves no special credit for a decision that should have been as easy as it was necessary. Nevertheless, it’s gratifying to know the man in the White House is engaged and has standards he’s devoted to enforcing.

As for me, I’m just glad to get rid of Waltz because that “t” in his name kept making me misspell the last name of Governor Knucklehead in Minnesota.

Unethical Quote of the Day: The Association of Professional Responsibility Lawyers

/ Jack Marshall / 5 Comments

“These rallies will focus on the importance of the rule of law, judicial independence and the need for lawyers to be free from the fear of retribution as a result of who they represent. The rallies will also involve the reaffirmation of our professional oaths.”

—One of the many alleged “ethics lawyers” promoting lawyer rallies in over 50 cities in today’s “Law Day of Action” protesting the Trump Presidency.

Too bad my sock drawer is in such bad shape…this group has mostly cheered on the Biden Administrations’ lawfare against Trump and the J-6 rioters as well as the politicized bar discipline inflicted on Trump’s lawyers. It has shrugged off large law firms capitulating to pressure from the Left and corporate clients not to represent conservative causes and public figures (so much for lawyers sincerely opposing “fear of retribution as a result of who they represent”), and members have remained silent while partisan judges have overstepped their authority to interfere with the lawful exercise of Presidential power.

There is no more hypocritical profession in American today than lawyers.

Comment of the Day: “Important Note on the News Media’s War on President Trump”

/ Jack Marshall / 6 Comments

Yesterday was another Axis media freak-out day over Trump Administration II. The first hundred days were officially over, thus it was a fine time for the Trump Deranged pimping for a socialist future and trying to pretend that they hadn’t propped up a fake President for four looooong years to tell us the nation is doomed because this time we know who is President and he is orange Hitler-Satan. It was really quite a spectacle, almost screaming-at-the-sky-level nuts. I regret not posting Chris Marschner‘s excellent Comment of the Day on tariffs then for contrast. It’s clear that the vast, vast, vast number of your progressive friends and mine literally don’t know what the hell they are talking about regarding tariffs, and the news media most people are likely to read as well as broadcast news regard the topic as the equivalent of a public reading of Proust. So all the whiners in the echo chamber know is that tariffs are bad. Then again, today’s doomsday chorus is almost as vocal as yesterday. Let’s see…there are at least eleven “Trump is a monster and going to destroy us” headlines on the New York Times home page if you count cleverly deceptive ones like In an Uncertain Economy, McDonald’s Sees Spending Decline. (McDonald’s has been charging obscenely high prices for crummy food since Democrats inflicted higher minimum wages on their unskilled workforce and inflation spiked during Biden’s presidency, so the “spending decline” has nothing to do with Trump. I’ve declined to go to a nearby Mickey D’s when I want a quick semi-edible meal since in 2022…)

Here is Chris’s Comment of the Day on the post, “Important Note on the Newsmedia’s War on President Trump”:

***

Americans in general have become spoiled. They do not seem to want to look beyond the immediate present to consider what is best for the nation in the long term.

[Commenter] Marrissa said “Everyone including people who love Trump want a good economy, low prices, and not have our important information leaked by someone who knows better.”

The question is at what cost? Low prices come at a cost to someone. Every dollar we give to China is one more they use to advance their Belt and Road strategy of global dominance. We fought a war here over the issue of slavery because it was at our doorstep but today we turn a blind eye to factory farms of China on which people are virtually imprisoned so we can get low prices on all sorts of products. I suppose it is not that we are against slavery we just don’t want to see it.

Just ten years ago the MXN Peso was worth about a dime and it is now worth less than a Nickel which means goods produced there cost half as much in terms of dollars. How is that possible if the US trade deficit with Mexico has exploded in that time frame? Demand for Mexican goods drive the value of a countries currency. The answer is foreign government manipulation.

What exactly does a good economy look like? Does it mean full employment even if that employment means part time work in multiple jobs or does it mean a balance between temporal value creation in service work and long term value creation in manufacturing. I say it means the latter even if it requires periodic realignments of resources between industrial production.

[Commenter Extradimensional Cephalopod] stated “People don’t like Trump because he seems almost actively hostile to the idea of demonstrating foresight and conscientiousness, even when it would work out better for his actual goals and his public image.”

How can EC say this? Is EC privy to the President’s deliberations? Trump had four years to develop a strategy and the say that he is hostile to demonstrating foresight and conscientiousness comes only from what he is able to glean from news reports. The exact same argument can be turned around on Trump’s critics because they are only looking toward the next election and not the impact on future generations.

EC questions the use of tariffs but there are few other tools in a presidential arsenal to limit the amount of American wealth being transferred to the CCP. How effective would moral suasion work on the American people with a fireside chat by Trump explaining the need to buy American products to protect our industries? It wouldn’t. Every country believes its consumers are an economic asset. Every dollar they spend on domestic goods and services directly benefits the domestic economy. Imports are treated as wealth leakages. We try to offset our wealth leakages with our exports that brings new wealth to our economy.

Much ink has been spilled condemning the tariffs but very little on some of the positive effects.

U.S.-based investments in President Trump’s second term:

Source: TRUMP EFFECT: A Running List of New U.S. Investment in President Trump’s Second Term – The White House

  • Project Stargate, led by Japan-based Softbank and U.S.-based OpenAI and Oracle, announced a $500 billion private investment in U.S.-based artificial intelligence infrastructure.
  • Apple announced a $500 billion investment in U.S. manufacturing and training.
  • NVIDIA, a global chipmaking giant, announced it will invest $500 billion in U.S.-based AI infrastructure over the next four years amid its pledge to manufacture AI supercomputers entirely in the U.S. for the first time.
  • IBM announced a $150 billion investment over the next five years in its U.S.-based growth and manufacturing operations.
  • Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) announced a $100 billion investment in U.S.-based chips manufacturing.
  • Johnson & Johnson announced a $55 billion investment over the next four years in manufacturing, research and development, and technology.
  • Roche, a Swiss drug and diagnostics company, announced a $50 billion investment in U.S.-based manufacturing and research and development, which is expected to create more than 1,000 full-time jobs and more than 12,000 jobs including construction.
  • Eli Lilly and Company announced a $27 billion investment to more than double its domestic manufacturing capacity.
  • United Arab Emirates-based ADQ and U.S.-based Energy Capital Partners announced a $25 billion investment in U.S. data centers and energy infrastructure.
  • Novartis, a Swiss drugmaker, announced a $23 billion investment to build or expand ten manufacturing facilities across the U.S., which will create 4,000 new jobs.
  • Hyundaiannounced a $21 billion U.S.-based investment — including $5.8 billion for a new steel plant in Louisiana, which will create nearly 1,500 jobs.
    • Hyundai also secured an equity investment and agreement from Posco Holdings, South Korea’s top steel maker.
  • United Arab Emirates-based DAMAC Properties announced a $20 billion investment in new U.S.-based data centers.
  • France-based CMA CGM, a global shipping giant, announced a $20 billion investment in U.S. shipping and logistics, creating 10,000 new jobs.
  • Merck announced it will invest $8 billion in the U.S. over the next several years after opening a new $1 billion North Carolina manufacturing facility.
  • Clarios announced a $6 billion plan to expand its domestic manufacturing operations.
  • Stellantis announced a $5 billion investment in its U.S. manufacturing network, including re-opening its Belvidere, Illinois, manufacturing plant.
  • Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a leader in biotechnology, announced a $3 billion agreement with Fujifilm Diosynth Biotechnologies to produce drugs at its North Carolina manufacturing facility.
  • NorthMark Strategies, a multi-strategy investment firm, announced a $2.8 billion investment to build a supercomputing facility in South Carolina.
  • Chobani, a Greek yogurt giant, announced a $1.2 billion investment to build its third U.S. dairy processing plant in New York, which is expected to create more than 1,000 new full-time jobs — adding to the company’s earlier announcement that it will invest $500 million to expand its Idaho manufacturing plant.
  • GE Aerospace announced a $1 billion investment in manufacturing across 16 states — creating 5,000 new jobs.
  • Amgen announced a $900 million investment in its Ohio-based manufacturing operation.
  • Schneider Electric announced it will invest $700 million over the next four years in U.S. energy infrastructure.
  • GE Vernova announced it will invest nearly $600 million in U.S. manufacturing over the next two years, which will create more than 1,500 new jobs.
  • Abbott Laboratories announced a $500 million investment in its Illinois and Texas facilities.
  • AIP Management, a European infrastructure investor, announced a $500 million investment to solar developer Silicon Ranch.
  • London-based Diageo announced a $415 million investment in a new Alabama manufacturing facility.
  • Dublin-based Eaton Corporation announced a $340 million investment in a new South Carolina-based manufacturing facility for its three-phase transformers.
  • Germany-based Siemens announced a $285 million investment in U.S. manufacturing and AI data centers, which will create more than 900 new skilled manufacturing jobs.
  • Clasen Quality Chocolate announced a $230 million investment to build a new production facility in Virginia, which will create 250 new jobs.
  • Fiserv, Inc., a financial technology provider, announced a $175 million investment to open a new strategic fintech hub in Kansas, which is expected to create 2,000 new high-paying jobs.
  • Paris Baguette announced a $160 million investment to construct a manufacturing plant in Texas.
  • TS Conductor announced a $134 million investment to build an advanced conductor manufacturing facility in South Carolina, which will create nearly 500 new jobs.
  • Switzerland-based ABB announced a $120 million investment to expand production of its low-voltage electrification products in Tennessee and Mississippi.
  • Saica Group, a Spain-based corrugated packaging maker, announced plans to build a $110 million new manufacturing facility in Anderson, Indiana.
  • Charms, LLC, a subsidiary of candymaker Tootsie Roll Industries, announced a $97.7 million investment to expand its production plant and distribution center in Tennessee.
  • Toyota Motor Corporation announced an $88 million investment to boost hybrid vehicle production at its West Virginia factory, securing employment for the 2,000 workers at the factory.
  • AeroVironment, a defense contractor, announced a $42.3 million investment to build a new manufacturing facility in Utah.
  • Paris-based Saint-Gobain announced a new $40 million NorPro manufacturing facility in Wheatfield, New York.
  • India-based Sygene International announced a $36.5 million acquisition of a Baltimore biologics manufacturing facility.
  • Asahi Group Holdings, one of the largest Japanese beverage makers, announced a $35 million investment to boost production at its Wisconsin plant.
  • Cyclic Materials, a Canadian advanced recycling company for rare earth elements, announced a $20 million investment in its first U.S.-based commercial facility, located in Mesa, Arizona.
  • Guardian Bikes announced a $19 million investment to build the first U.S.-based large-scale bicycle frame manufacturing operation in Indiana.
  • Amsterdam-based AMG Critical Minerals announced a $15 million investment to build a chrome manufacturing facility in Pennsylvania.
  • NOVONIX Limited, an Australia-based battery technology company, announced a $4.6 million investment to build a synthetic graphite manufacturing facility in Tennessee.
  • LGM Pharma announced a $6 million investment to expand its manufacturing facility in Rosenberg, Texas.
  • ViDARR Inc., a defense optical equipment manufacturer, announced a $2.69 million investment to open a new facility in Virginia.

That doesn’t even include the U.S. investments pledged by foreign countries:

  • United Arab Emirates announced a $1.4 trillion investment in the U.S. over the next decade.
  • Saudi Arabia announced it intends to invest $600 billion in the U.S. over the next four years.
  • Japan announced a $1 trillion investment in the U.S.
  • Taiwan announced a pledge to boost its U.S.-based investment.

I don’t recall the media making much about this at all.

I challenge those who believe that Trump is leading us down a road to ruin with tariffs to put forth an alternative. If we would have recommended that all goods imported into the United States meet our stricter environmental and workplace safety standards in lieu of tariffs it would mean that virtually no Chinese goods could enter our consumption stream. Electric vehicles would become impossible to produce because the costs of extracting the raw materials would be prohibitively expensive without the child labor employed. Global workers would have to be paid in accordance to our minimum wage laws. We can’t have that either because we all want more stuff at the lowest possible price. Our grandkids be damned. Let them pay the bill.

Michigan Magistrate Judge Ray Kent, Fuddy-Duddy of the Month

/ Jack Marshall / 14 Comments

Who’s being unethical here? Obviously the judge thought it was the lawyer, and judges win these arguments. Still…

Federal magistrate judge Ray Kent was so offended by a law firm’s dragon logo appearing on each page of a plaintiff’s complaint that he struck the lawsuit filed by attorney Jacob Perrone on behalf of an inmate accusing jail officials in Clinton County, Michigan of being “deliberately indifferent” to her when she started vomiting. Perrone’s firm is called Dragon Lawyers, a perfectly acceptable name now that all but one state permits firms to have trade names rather than the traditional firm titles featuring the names of founders and partners. As you can see, the firm’s logo was embedded in the document….

…but faintly: I don’t see anything to flip out over, but flip the magistrate did. In his order Judge Kent noted that “each page of plaintiff’s complaint appears on an e-filing which is dominated by a large multicolored cartoon dragon dressed in a suit, presumably because she is represented by the law firm of ‘Dragon Lawyers PC © Award Winning Lawyers. Use of this dragon cartoon logo is not only distracting, it is juvenile and impertinent,” Judge Kent wrote. “The Court is not a cartoon.”

And thus it was that Judge Kent gave Perrone’s client until May 5 to refile her lawsuit “without the cartoon dragon.” He also ordered her not to file “any other documents with the cartoon dragon or other inappropriate content.”

Various commentators, including the estimable Eugene Volokh, seem to think this example of a judge abusing his authority and throwing a fit over a law firm’s logo is funny. I don’t think it’s funny. True, Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f)(1) allows a court to “strike from a pleading an insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter.” But how is the dragon logo for a firm named “Dragon” impertinent or scandalous? Calling the logo “redundant” is a stretch just because it was on every page: so what?

The issue isn’t worth fighting about, so the lawyer apologized; if he wanted to fight, I think he would have a solid First Amendment argument. I guess we should be grateful that the judge didn’t help an illegal immigrant avoid ICE by sneaking out the back door.

At least as far as we know…

NYT Stockholm Syndrome Pundit David Brooks Finally Wrote Something Astute and Fair Regarding Trump, So Naturally My Trump-Deranged Friend Condemns Him For It

/ Jack Marshall / 14 Comments

Imagine the late James Earl Jones’ resonant bass intoning, “THIS is Trump Derangement!” and you have the perfect backdrop for my depressing story.

A retired lawyer of great accomplishments and gravitas has recently erupted into repeated anti-Trump/anti-Republican rants on Facebook. I consider him a good freind and generally a wise one—and he’s a passionate baseball fan!—so it pains me to read this sad evidence of mental and ethical deterioration. His most recent screed began with a declaration that he now detests David Brooks. As the Ethics Alarms Brooks dossier vividly shows, there are plenty of reasons to detest Brooks, an obnoxious and arrogant conservative in his Daily Standard days, and now a sell-out who accepted the dishonest role as a token non-progressive propagandist on the New York Times opinion page and quickly “cut the cloth of his conscience to fit the fashion of the Times,” (to quote Lillian Hellman at the McCarthy hearings, except that when she said it, she used a small “t.”)

[Yikes! I just looked over my own collection of Brooks posts, and he’s even worse than I remembered. In October of 2023, for example, I nailed him for writing that President Biden was still sharp and capable though it was obvious then, a year before Biden’s debate babble-fest, that Joe was demented.]

But my learned, once rational friend wasn’t critical of Brooks for any of his lies and hypocrisy; he now detests Brooks because of this column, in which the pundit gives President Trump credit for something. It is a trait that I have also noted: Trump has amazing energy and drive, to the point of being indomitable. Brooks begins his column this way:

Continue reading →

How Dishonest Is Harvard? Here’s a Clue…

/ Jack Marshall / 5 Comments

My Spring edition of the Harvard alumni magazine just arrived. It was clearly written before Trump’s assault on the school had reached its current zenith, but the magazine’s spinning away of Harvard’s various ethical transgressions was still in evidence, as it always is.

I found one feature more head-exploding than the rest. An alum of recent vintage mocked a previous issue essay warning that Harvard’s “financial foundations” were “at risk” of being “shattered” because of Trump’s barbarians in Washington breaching the metaphorical gates. Pointing to his alma mater’s approximately 53 billion dollar endowment, the contrarian grad wrote, “Given the general Harvard ethos that taxing the rich is a virtue, you would think that taxing the richest—-Harvard—would be embraced, not cause for alarm. What hypocrisy.”

The editor tit-tutted that the writer was mistaken, because Harvard’s endowment per student was less than some other institutions, such as Princeton. Oh. What a neat way to minimize the size of an massive endowment! Amusingly, another letter in the same issue suggested that Harvard use that device, endowment dollars per student, to combat attacks, stating the endowment as “X dollars per student” rather than cumulatively.

Obviously, the staff adopted the suggestion immediately.