Yecchh.

If I were still teaching legal ethics at American’s law school, I would resign in protest over this.

“Remember Pearl Harbor and the members of the Japanese and German communities that suffered tragic losses in the weeks that followed that tragic day.”

“Remember 9/11, and the many who died that day, including the brave terrorists who sacrificed their lives for what they believed, and those American soldiers, Iraqi combatants and brave Taliban warriors who died in the months and years that followed.”

What needs to be remembered is that on October 7, not for the first time, Palestinian terrorists murdered innocent Jewish civilians in Israel as part of the long-standing mission of wiping that nation from the map. We need to remember the victims, the perpetrators of this crime against humanity, the motives behind this horrific act, and the anti-Israel and anti-Semitic forces in the U.S. and abroad that are enabling the terrorists by condemning and attempting to block Israel’s necessary military response.

Often in life, one has to pick a side in a conflict after careful consideration of the issues and values involved. If you don’t have the courage and integrity to do that and accept the consequences of your choice, then shut up and stay on the sidelines with the other weenies.

American University is teaching its students exactly the wrong ethical lesson.

_______________

Added: And here is the fatuous, intellectually bankrupt “Imagine”-level twaddle from Barack Obama, insulting the intelligence of everyone who reads it:

“One year ago, Hamas launched a horrific attack against Israel, killing over 1,400 Israeli citizens – including defenseless women, children, and the elderly – and kidnapping hundreds more. Today, the prospects of peace seem more distant than ever. But we continue to hope for a return of all the hostages, an end to the violence, a rejection of hate, and a future in which both Israelis and Palestinians can enjoy the security and stability that most of them yearn for.”

The overall lesson: “You can’t win, you can’t break even, so you might as well stop trying to pander to the woke at all and let the metaphorical chips fall where they may.”

Believe it or not, that innocuous ad has triggered controversy from the racial offense and grievance mob. Apparently it promotes negative black stereotypes! That’s strange: the problem in the U.S. black community is that most children are born without their parents being married at all: this happy photo rejects that reality. It also looks like a rather affluent family wedding: isn’t the negative stereotype that black families are poor? (Although, come to think of it, what up-scale wedding reception would serve spaghetti with Heinz tomato sauce from a jar?) And aren’t whites supposedly to be racists? How is an inter-racial marriage perpetuating that negative stereotype? Wait, is the stereotype that the older balck woman is wearing a hat?

No, the complaint seems to be that the ad shows the groom’s white parents and an older black woman who represents the bride’s mother. See, the ad “erased” black fathers: it implies that the bride’s black dad is off whoring, or something, and that Mom is a single mother. Who would see the ad that way, except those who embrace the negative stereotype with their own confirmation bias?

Continue reading →

With a month to go, I am cautiously optimistic that the American public will reject the cynical, dishonest, undemocratic candidacy of Kamala Harris and the inexcusable Tim Walz. I am pessimistic about the nation avoiding another Electoral College-elected President who trailed in the popular vote.

Right now, it sure looks like this is where he are headed, and such an unfortunate result will almost certainly spark violence, again give Democrats an excuse to deny Trump’s legitimacy as President, lead to further assaults on the Constitution (which Democrats increasingly want eliminate or marginalize), and guarantee another four years of escalating unethical, divisive, dangerous partisan warfare. Trump, of course, will not help matters as he will not be able to resist gloating and trolling, as is his pattern. Great. I can’t wait.

The popular vote/ Electoral vote conflict is almost entirely California’s fault. Harris votes will overwhelm Trump votes by nearly 2-1 in our most populous state, and that is because California has become more of a cult than anything else. Its voters are bat-crazy over climate change hysteria, increasingly don’t like enforcing laws, sympathize with shop-lifters, extol illegal immigrants, and enable censorship. Significantly, California is the only state seriously contemplating the very unserious, irresponsible and racist policy of reparations, even though slavery was never legal in the state. On my cognitive dissonance scale, winning the popular vote in California is an indictment, not an accomplishment.

In other matters…

Continue reading →

There was a time when I thought I would have enjoyed the job of being the New York Times advice columnist, “The Ethicist.” In the last year or so, however, the questions the current column-holder has answered have tended to indicate basic ethics problem-solving skills among the public have fallen to an abysmal level. And these are supposed to be the best questions received by Kwame Anthony Appiah, a philosophy professor at NYU. Heavens to Betsy, what are the other questions like?

This week’s top question was this:

Continue reading →