Dead Wife Condolences Ethics

/ Jack Marshall / 8 Comments

Consider this a further reflection on the matters explored in this post, written just two days after my wife Grace died suddenly of causes undetermined.

The past two months have been a series of revelations. People’s responses to a personal tragedy befalling someone else illustrate a lot about them, society, and human nature generally.

Such moments are when true friends show their character. I wrote earlier about my friend Tom Fuller jumping into his car and driving the ten hours from Connecticut to Alexandria even as I told him not to. Tom checked into a hotel and gave me desperately needed emotional support and expert assistance—he’s a lawyer, tax specialist and obsessively organized individual in sharp contrast to me—for five days. My sister, with whom I have often had an adversarial relationship, also came through, handling many tasks related to Grace’s death that I was ill-equipped to deal with emotionally and in some cases financially. Both of them have subsequently checked in with me by phone almost every day.

Continue reading →

Ethics Dunce: Scientific American

/ Jack Marshall / 13 Comments

The ethical principle at issue here shouldn’t be hard: “Do your job.” Unfortunately, it is apparently too hard for the scientists and researchers at Scientific American. Just as American journalism, sports teams, the entertainment industry–ethicists!— and others have been unable to resist the siren song of political activism, the once reliable and trustworthy general consumption science magazine so essential to my early education in the subject has capitulated to wokeness and now feels that its mission of exploring and explaining science to non-scientists includes political and partisan advocacy.

Will going woke mean, as the saying goes, that “S.A.” (as its friends call it) will “go broke”? Time will tell. This kind of beach of trust, integrity and mission, however, deserves to be fatal.

This week, the magazine unveiled its criticism of news media reporting on the campus pro-Hamas demonstrations. Science! In fact, the article is little more than a standard progressive rationalization of the protests. It is transparently presented with rhetoric that suggests legitimate scientific inquiry, (“For over a decade, my research has extensively explored…”) but the author isn’t a scientist. She’s a professor of journalism; more to the point, she’s a black community activist journalist clearly in the intersectionality and advocacy journalism camps:

Continue reading →

The Nathan Wade Interview: Apparently Fulton County Lawyers Don’t Get That “Legal Ethics” Thingy…or Ethics Generally

/ Jack Marshall / 11 Comments

I find the transcript of the interview of deposed Fani Willis prosecutor and loverboy Nathan Wade many things: damning, outrageous, disgusting, shocking. Mostly I find it to be more evidence that I have wasted the last 25 years trying to make the legal profession more ethical. This guy, a “prominent and respected Atlanta lawyer,” not only doesn’t know what ethics is, he’s infuriatingly smug about his ignorance.

These are the people Democrats have placed in charge of “saving democracy” by using the criminal laws to keep Donald Trump from delivering condign justice to the Biden presidency, as in crushing, unequivocal defeat.

On Sunday’s “World News Tonight” and Monday’s “Good Morning America” ABC revealed two segments (here and here) from an “exclusive” interview with former Fulton County, Georgia special prosecutor Nathan Wade. He was, you’ll recall, forced to withdraw from the lucrative gig gifted to him by his girlfriend Fani Willis by the judge in the case, Willis’s prosecution of Donald Trump for “election interference.”

If there are more segments, I think I’ll pass: cleaning up the serial head explosions caused by what I’ve seen already is more than enough for me. Nothing in them could change my mind about Wade (or Willis) at this point. He’s not just an unethical lawyer.He’s a fick. And an asshole.

I’ll just repeat some of the more glaring statements so you get the idea:

  • Asked how he could endanger a high profile prosecution by letting an illicit romance pollute the prosecution: “You don’t plan to develop feelings. You don’t plan to fall in love. You don’t plan to  have some relationship in the workplace that we  you don’t set out to do that and those things develop organically. They develop over  over time. And the  the minute we had that sobering moment, we discontinued it.”

I see: he’s 13 years old, then….just so darned romantic or horny that he couldn’t help himself, even though this was exactly the opposite of professional behavior. Continue reading →

Performers Making Random People Happy: This Is a Good Thing

/ Jack Marshall / 5 Comments

“In these troubled times,” as a weenie college president would put it today, we need to acknowledge the random acts that make life a little bit brighter for people, especially those acts that might file themselves permanently in an individual’s “thrills and fond memories” collection.

In the video above, the singer/songwriter known as Jewel (her real name is Jewel Kilcher) provided one of those random acts. At 49, she’s past her pop culture stardom prime by about two decades, transitioning into the “Masked Singer” contestant and “Star-Spangled Banner” stage. But she’s sold 30 million albums, and qualifies as a major singing star, if one whose fan base now mostly qualifies as middle-aged.

Jewel was recruited by the website “Funny or Die” for a stunt reminiscent of the old “Candid Camera” show. She agreed to submit to extensive make-up and wardrobe subterfuge to disguise herself, and to visit a Karaoke bar as a mousy, reluctant recruit to go on stage and sing some of her own songs. The results can be seen in the video. First the crowd is thrilled at the spectacle of an unlikely candidate revealing herself as a genuine talent, and later, when she revealed her true identity, joyful in the realization that a celebrity singer had given them an unexpected fun experience they could tell their friends and family about.

I love this kind of thing. Back in 2013, Ethics Alarms saluted Neil Diamond for spontaneously and for no compensation leading Red Sox fans in their nightly “Sweet Caroline” serenade. I have been consistently critical of Mandy Potenkin, but he has revealed in interviews that when a child recognizes him in public as “Inigo Montoya” from “The Princess Bride,” he leans down and whispers in the kid’s ear, “My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.”

Celebrities can abuse their unique status in our society, or they can employ it to bring a little joy into our hum drum lives, as Lena Lamont so memorably said…

Good for Jewel.

Ethics Observations on RFK Jr.’s ….Brain Worm??

/ Jack Marshall / 15 Comments

As various pundits on Prof. Reynold’s Instapundit are wont to say of such news, “Who had “Presidential candidates with brain worms” on their 2024 bingo card?“

The New York Times tells us today that in 2010, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. “was experiencing memory loss and mental fogginess so severe that a friend grew concerned he might have a brain tumor.” After consulting several neurologists, RFK had the mystery solved. His cognitive problems were “caused by a worm that got into my brain and ate a portion of it and then died,” Kennedy says.

Oh.

All righty then! What can we take from this development?

1. Kudos to RFK Jr. for candor and honesty. The other candidates haven’t been so forthcoming. President Biden won’t undergo cognitive testing, or if he will, he won’t reveal what the results were.

2. Yet the Times informs us that despite this startling revelation, Kennedy’s campaign refuses to release his complete medical records. There are worse things in there than the fact that a worm ate part of his brain? Oh-oh…

3. I still salute RFK’s courage. If this doesn’t launch a thousand jokes and memes, I’ll be disappointed. (I won’t offer any, because I don’t want to be accused of “worm-shaming.”)

4. Given Kennedy’s frequently extreme and even bizarre opinions, the reflex response from many will be, “That explains a lot.” Not from me though! Uh-uh.

5. When asked if any of Kennedy’s health issues could compromise his fitness for the presidency, RFK’s spokesperson, Stefanie Spear, replied, “That is a hilarious suggestion, given the competition.”

If she had not taken advantage of a straight line like that, I would have been disappointed. To her credit, Spear deposited that metaphorical hanging curve in the upper deck.

MIT Geniuses Finally Figure Out That Forcing Faculty To Pledge Fealty To Woke World Isn’t Academic Freedom

/ Jack Marshall / 6 Comments

From one perspective, this development seems encouraging. Maybe the lesson of “The Emperor’s New Clothes” is finally starting to take down the destructive DEI delusion.

The Massachusetts Institute of Technology announced that it will end the use of diversity statements in the faculty hiring process. These statements, typically a page-long, were required of all faculty candidates so they could persuade the institution that they could be relied upon to support and enhance the university’s commitment to “diversity.” The statements are now routine in faculty hiring at many public and private universities, as well in corporations and other organizations. I confess that I had not focused on this development sufficiently; it is scary, and the mainstream media and its pundits apparently felt it was not something “the public has a right to know.” [The only previous Ethics Alarms essay on diversity statements is here. I helped sound the alarm, and then did nothing for two years.]

As she announced the reform, MIT’s president Sally Kornbluth, the lone survivor of the fateful Congressional hearing that led to the dismissal of two other female presidents of elite universities, the University of Pennsylvania and Harvard, condemned the statements as compelled speech. “My goals are to tap into the full scope of human talent, to bring the very best to M.I.T. and to make sure they thrive once here,” Dr. Kornbluth said . “We can build an inclusive environment in many ways, but compelled statements impinge on freedom of expression, and they don’t work.”

Interesting phrasing. If they “worked,” whatever sinister meaning that has, would she be eliminating them? The diversity statements are not just compelled speech, they represent compelled ideological conformity. That’s fascist stuff. Explain to me again: who are the “threats to democracy”? It also points to the other perspective besides the one I alluded to at the beginning. The fact that diversity statements has infested academia at all is ominous.

Continue reading →

More Re-Branding Ethics: “What is This ‘Boy Scouts’ of Which You Speak?”

/ Jack Marshall / 44 Comments

No sooner had I posted about the DEI scam trying to hide its spots sufficiently to keep on inflicting discrimination and bias —but good discrimination and bias, of course!—on the American workplace and society in general than news of a sadder and more futile re-branding exercise was announced.

After 114 years of teaching boys ethical values, self-reliance, and life skills, the Boy Scouts of America is abandoning its storied name to escape its sordid recent past, its mismanagement, and its betrayal of its mission and legacy. That’s not the spin, though. The newly named “Scouting America” is being promoted as signaling a more “welcoming” organization. “Though our name will be new, our mission remains unchanged: we are committed to teaching young people to be Prepared. For Life,” Roger A. Krone, president and chief executive of Scouting America, said in a statement today. “This will be a simple but very important evolution as we seek to ensure that everyone feels welcome in Scouting.”

Continue reading →

“DEI? What DEI?”

/ Jack Marshall / 33 Comments

This is so typical that it’s mordantly amusing.

The diversity, equity, inclusion fad arising for no coherent reason out of the death of an overdosing small time hood under the knee of a bad cop in Minneapolis has rapidly iembarrassed itself and its adherents. The discriminatory and intellectually indefensible movement still managed to be profitable for a lot of scam-artist consultants while screwing up too many organizations to list in the process (but Disney quickly comes to mind). It inflicted flagrant incompetents like Kamala Harris, Karine Jean-Pierre, most of Biden’s Cabinet, deposed Harvard President Claudine Gay and so many more on our government and institutions. It produced absurd spectacles like the TV liquor commercial purporting to show a Boston bar’s patrons singing “Sweet Caroline,” the Boston Red Sox 7th inning anthem, with barely a white patron in sight. (When my family would go to Fenway Park, “Find a non-white fan” was a popular game, usually instigated by my mother.)

DEI is justly acquiring a toxic reputation, so the Left’s response is to change its name and start all over again. The plan is to use rhetorical deceit to disguise its intent and meaning while blurring the concept. Of course! DEI fouled itself faster than I expected, but sure, everyone should have seen this coming. Abortion is now “reproductive health.” Using drugs, surgery and indoctrination to turn biological boys into sort-of girls and biological girls into kind-of boys is now “gender-reaffirming care. The cover-word for illegal alaines became “undocumented workers,” then became “migrants,” and now it’s “visitors.” Now the acronym DEI is on the way out. Anti-DEI legislation is gaining traction in several states, and the racial, ethnic and gender preference industry is getting the message. No, it won’t stop advocating and facilitating discrimination against whites and males. The plan is to call the practice something else. After all, the trick has worked before.

Continue reading →

Yes, This Is Too Easy, But Still: Ethics Observations on Gov. Hochul’s Condescending Black Stereotype Hyperbole…

/ Jack Marshall / 25 Comments

“I mispoke and I regret it,” was the serial head-exploding Democratic governor of New York’s attempt at backtracking after she claimed, during a speech at the Milken Institute Global Conference in Los Angeles, “Right now we have, you know, young black kids growing up in the Bronx who don’t even know what the word “computer” is. They don’t know. They don’t know these things.”

“Of course black children in the Bronx know what computers are — the problem is that they too often lack access to the technology needed to get on track to high-paying jobs in emerging industries like AI,” Hochul said in her desperate mea culpa. “That’s why I’ve been focused on increasing economic opportunity since Day One of my Administration.”

If it’s really “Of course,” Governor, then why did you say what you said? And emphasize it three times?

Hochul’s scripted smear of the black children in her state triggered instant, if in some cases restrained, condemnation from her own party. “I’m deeply troubled by the recent statements made by Governor Kathy Hochul,” wrote New York State Assembly Member John Zaccaro Jr. in a statement. “The underlying perception conveyed about Black and brown children from the Bronx is not only disheartening but also deeply concerning.” Assembly Member Karines Reyes tweeted that she was “deeply disturbed” by Hochul’s remarks and “the underlying perception that she has of Black & brown children from the BX” because “Our children are bright, brilliant, extremely capable, and more than deserving of any opportunities that are extended to other kids,” Reyes wrote. “Do better.” Assembly Member Amanda Septimo called Hochul’s comments “harmful, deeply misinformed, and genuinely appalling,” adding that the Governor was “repeating harmful stereotypes.” Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie described Hochul’s remarks as “inartful and hurtful.”

Observations:

Continue reading →

Ethics Heroes: 13 Federal Judges

/ Jack Marshall / 17 Comments

Thirteen federal judges—appellate Judges James Ho and Elizabeth Branch, Matthew Solomson of the U.S Court of Federal Claims, District Judges Alan Albright and Matthew Kacsmaryk, Stephen Vaden, who sits on the United States Court of International Trade; plus judges David Counts, James W. Hendrix, Jeremy D. Kernodle, Tilman E. Self, III, Brantley Starr, Drew B. Tipton and Daniel M. Traynor—have all announced in a letter to Columbia University’s president, that beginning with the entering class of 2024, they “will not hire anyone who joins the Columbia University community—whether as undergraduates or law students.”

“Since the October 7 terrorist attacks by Hamas, Columbia University has become ground zero for the explosion of student disruptions, anti-semitism, and hatred for diverse viewpoints on campuses across the Nation, ” the letter begins. “Disruptors have threatened violence, committed assaults, and destroyed property. As judges who hire law clerks every year to serve in the federal judiciary, we have lost confidence in Columbia as an institution of higher education. Columbia has instead become an incubator of bigotry. As a result, Columbia has disqualified itself from educating the future leaders of our country.”

After suggesting measures that need to be taken to restore trust in the institution, the judges conclude, “Recent events demonstrate that ideological homogeneity throughout the entire institution of Columbia has destroyed its ability to train future leaders of a pluralistic and intellectually diverse country. Both professors and administrators are on the front lines of the campus disruptions, encouraging the virulent spread of antisemitism and bigotry. Significant and dramatic change in the composition of its faculty and administration is required to restore confidence in Columbia.”

It is a responsible, powerful, and much needed response, both to the institution and the students who have demonstrated both an absence of critical thinking and judicious temperament as well basic respect for their fellow students, liberal education, and the law.

Now do Harvard.