This has been a banner few months for “The Squad.” The one male member of the frighteningly incompetent, unethical and offensive band of far Left Democrats of Color disgraced himself by setting off a false fire alarm to try to block a vote in the House and claiming it was an accident, an obvious lie. Rep. Tlaib got herself censored for publicly advocating wiping Israel off the map. Rep. Omar recently proclaimed that her first loyalties were to Somalia rather than her adopted country, the U.S. Rep. Cori Bush, by most estimates the dumbest and least qualified of the gang, is being investigated by the Justice Dept, for misusing campaign funds. AOC, of course, is perpetually ridiculous. Let’s see, what has she done lately? Oh, she’s accusing Israel of “genocide” because it is waging war against the region that launched a surprise terror attack against its civilians, as it should and must. It’s an ignorant and indefensible position, but that’s Rep. Ocasio-Cortez. She’s like that pretty much all the time.
Yet amidst all of this, Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass) has been out of the limelight, and not keeping up her end of the bargain in behaving appropriately Squad-like. I’ve been disappointed in her. Fortunately, she came out smokin’ this week, accusing Walgreens of engaging in a “life-threatening act of racial and economic discrimination” in its decision to close one of its branches in Boston’s overwhelmingly black neighborhood of Roxbury.
I have always thought not, but the tale of Pookie and Jett, the silly couple pictured above, is causing me to re-think that conclusion.
Because of my oft-mentioned sock drawer issues, I never heard of TikTok stars Campbell Puckett and her hubby Jett, and was happy in my ignorance.
The Georgia couple, like so many entertainingly trivial people, became prominent and wealthy on TikTok because—and I do NOT understand this— Campbell, aka “Pookie,” posts videos of the pair modeling their outfits as Jett blathers on about his wife. “Pookie looks absolutely amazing,”says in a recent video. It has been viewed over 6 million times.
The Times article focuses on the almost inevitable result of social media fame and fortune: eventually, someone sets out to dig and find dirt on the “stars” to bring them down. On Reddit, someone posted photos of Pookie, including one in which she was posing in front of a Confederate flag. This, of course, means she’s a racist and is a defender of slavery, or something. Another showed her wearing a “Gone with the Wind”-style gown as a costume for an “Old South” plantation-themed ball. Mrs. Campbell has told publications that she regrets the photos, but that she was 20 and “didn’t fully understand the impact of my actions the way I do now.” She has grovelled an apology “for the harm this may have caused for some and take full responsibility.” Of course she has. She’s an aspiring “influencer” with nothing to justify her power and influence but her popularity.
The episode has been cited by the Times as a teachable moment, demonstrating how “everyone should understand the speed and ease with which everyone’s entire online experience is available for public consumption.” That’s worth thinking about, but I’m wrestling with whether my reaction to Pookie’s Predicament should be sympathy or a Nelson…
My general ethics position here is that no one should be held to account for old social media posts unless the posts have direct relevance to a current public figure’s statements, positions and stated values, and even then, evidence that a previous impolitic, undiplomatic or otherwise disreputable statement no longer is a fair representation of that individual’s character should be considered definitive. Attacking a star baseball player for dumb tweets he made to a handful of friends in high school is wildly unfair, for example. Old social media posts that indicate that rabid leftist propagandist such as, just to pull a name out of the hat, MSNBC’s prime racist Joy Reid, was an unabashed homophobe and gay-basher before her cable TV gig are a bit more justifiable, especially when they provoke a reaction like Reid’s, which was to lie her head off.
Part of me wants to say that social media dirt-farming is a valid and ethical enterprise when it exposes hypocrites, villains and poseurs, with “influencers” like the Pucketts falling into the latter category. That same part is inclined to argue that people who influence millions with no real expertise or special powers of perception are irresponsible and dangerous, and taking them down a hundred pegs or so is a virtuous objective That part also believes that public figures invite public scrutiny, and if their past actions and statements can’t stand up to that scrutiny, well, that’s good to know.
Another part, however, feels that setting out to harm someone’s reputation and livelihood when an individual isn’t doing anyone any harm is mean-spirited and wrong.
Playing a practical joke on a friend and traveling companion is acceptable, providing one is confident that no harm will attach to the victim, and that you would have no issue if the same were done to you.
Posting a video of said friend looking like an idiot, however, or not making certain that a third party is not recording what transpires, is unethical absent the victim’s explicit consent.
If I were maintaining a “lie database” on Joe Biden (like the Washington Post does, among others, on Donald Trump) this would go right on it. And yes, I have not read a single analysis on any source that explains the deceitful quality of the President’s latest executive order. Unlike several of the others, this one is constitutional. It is just completely misleading, and deliberately so.
Yesterday, Biden ordered financial and travel sanctions on Israeli settlers accused of violent attacks on Palestinians in the West Bank. That explanation at the top of the New York Times story cleared up initial confusion on my part. “Biden issues executive order targeting Israeli settlers who attack Palestinians” was the headline at Axios, and similar headlines abound. Huh? Does Biden think that he, like Leonardo DiCaprio, is King of the World? What power does the President of the United States have over citizens of foreign nations who aren’t in the United States? The answer, for those of you praying that J Biden and the Democrats can save democracy from the previous President who abuses presidential power, is none. None. The executive order is grandstanding of the most cynical sort. Biden literally could issue similar fanciful orders “sanctioning” Parisians who annoy visiting Americans by being rude to them with as much effect.
That cartoon above, showing apparent Zionists (as in “Jews”) sipping Gazan blood like wine, is probably the most outrageous of political cartoonist Dwayne Booth’s works…I don’t know, maybe this one is..
All a matter of taste, I guess. The ethics question is, now what, if anything?
Booth is a lecturer at the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg School of Communication having joined the school as an adjunct faculty member in 2015. Political cartooning is certainly a valid courss of study. He currently teaches two classes, but since Hamas’s October 7 terror attack, his off-campus cartooning has become especially controversial.
Booth publishes political cartoons under the pen name “Mr. Fish.” One of his classes teaches students the political cartooning art by exploring “the purpose and significance of image-based communication as an unparalleled propagator of both noble and nefarious ideas,” according to Penn’s website. “Work presented will be chosen for its unique ability to demonstrate the inflammatory effect of weaponized visual jokes, uncensored commentary, and critical thinking on a society so often perplexed by artistic free expression and radicalized creative candor.”
You can see more of Booth’s anti-Israel cartoons here. As far as I can determine, there is not sufficient basis for disciplining him or ending his association with the school. Political cartooning, though I personally view it as a crude, over-rated and deceitful form of editorial, is by nature extreme in device and approach. Booth’s own political opinions and obvious anger at Israel that he expresses as “Mr. Fish” or on social media are not relevant to his value teaching the political cartooning craft, and would seem to be squarely within the margins of both academic freedom and the first Amendment, provided that his commentary in class and on campus are not directed at Jewish students.
However, if a school, like the University of Pennsylvania, decided that, at a time when there are unusual tensions around the Gaza-Israel conflict its lecturer should cool his public fervor or consider another teaching position elsewhere, that would be a fully ethically defensible position. He’s right at the line now.
“The impeachment process is not intended to be used as a political weapon. The move to impeach Mayorkas is a pointless sideshow and deserves to fail.”
Incredible. The CNN column by lawyer Raul Reyesnicked so many Ethics Alarms categories that I couldn’t figure out which way to turn. The whole article is disingenuous, and the work of an ethics dunce. The quote above is unethical in its deliberate failure to acknowledge relevant history. That CNN, of all places, would publish an article calling for the impeachment device to be used sparingly and legitimately by Congress is offensive. And it made my head explode, qualifying it as an automatic KABOOM!
Two NYPD officers were brutally attacked by a gang of migrants while they were trying to enforce the law. Where does this end? pic.twitter.com/BymxcH6hag
Great—even a dyed-in-the-wool conservative gadfly like Ian Miles Chong is adopting coded woke-speak now. Those aren’t migrants, kicking and beating on NYC police. They are illegal immigrants.Darwin Andres Gomez Izquiel, 19, Kelvin Servat Arocha, 19, Juarez Wilson, 21, Yorman Reveron, 24, and Jhoan Boada, 22, were chased down, arrested, and charged with assault. They they were released without bail, because, as we know, the criminal justice system is racist letting criminal go while depending on an honor system to get them before a judge or jury is the sensitive policy. Illegal immigrants have demonstrated that they have no respect for our laws, and ny attacking cops, these illegals have demonstrated that they have no intention of being law abiding citizens. Writes fire-breathing conservative columnist Athena Thornein response to that video:
“In New York City, Biden and Mayorkas’s legacy plays out daily. Asylum scammers continue to romp around the Big, Rotten Apple, merrily shoplifting businesses into oblivion, burning down buildings with their off-brand lithium-ion batteries, and mowing down New Yorkers with their e-bikes and uninsured vehicles in hit-and-run incidents. Lawlessness breeds lawlessness. And we taxpayers have the privilege of bankrolling all of it.
At the beginning of her column, she describes the video as “Trump’s latest campaign ad.”
It’s hard for me to see how she’s wrong. When people vote for the almost incredibly flawed Donald Trump, they are voting against scenes like what we see above.
I have a two-hour session on professionalism and legal ethics to teach this morning, so I’m going to ask readers to submit and discuss their own ethics stories, issues and observations a day early. Surprise!
Pop Quiz: Without cheating, can you identify the handsome Confederate general above, and why he’s an appropriate symbol of today’s Open Forum?
Michael Cassidy, the former Mississippi candidate for Congress who destroyed the Christmas seasonal display put up by Satanists at the Iowa State Capitol building , was ultimately charged not just with criminal mischief, which is a misdemeanor and what such vandalism would usually draw as an offense, but felony third-degree criminal mischief. The enhanced charge was justified, according to the prosecutor, because the act was committed “in violation of individual rights” under Iowa’s hate crime statute.
The statue Cassidy attacked was of Baphomet, who isn’t exactly Satan but close enough for horseshoes, or goatshoes. The ancient pagan deity is used as a symbolic trademark by the Satanic Temple, a largely satirical pro-atheism and anti-religion organization. He’s a little like Mickey Mouse is to Disney. Understandably, however, serious Christians regard using Ol’ Baphy’s image to “celebrate” the Christian holiday of Christmas as blasphemy, which it is, because that’s how the Satanic Temple rolls. It think blasphemy is a joke. To that group, all religion is a joke.
Michael Cassidy is one of millions who don’t get it.
Your Ethics Alarms Ethics Quiz of the Day is…
Should a hateful act against a statue that mocks Christianity be treated as a hate crime?
“Evidence shows the defendant made statements to law enforcement and the public indicating he destroyed the property because of the victim’s religion,” triggering the violation of individual rights enhancement, said Lynn Hicks, a spokesman for the Polk County Attorney’s Office.
Wow, an entire office of assholes! The man committed a crime and an act of civil disobedience, protesting what he views as the absurdity of the state having to give a supposed Satanic organization equal representation with other religions in a holiday display. I have no idea what is gained by over-charging and taking the apparent position that it’s illegal to hate the personification of evil. Some legal commentators have climbed into the high weeds about whether atheism or Satanism are legitimate religions; the same weeds are available for debates over Pastafarians (The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster) and Scientologists. It’s an unnecessary issue here.
Hate crimes are thought crimes and, at Ethics Alarms, unethical to charge whatever they involve. Michael Cassidy should be allowed to hate Satan, Baphomet, their followers real or satirical, those who mock Christianity and Christmas and anyone or anything else he chooses, as long as he doesn’t also destroy property.
Chita Rivera, veteran musical comedy star, actress and dancer extraordinaire, has died at 91. She had a remarkable career and an unusually long one. I saw Chita perform live but once, long after her prime in a West End production of “The Kiss of the Spider Woman,” a not-so-great and over-hyped musical. Rivera had major roles in the hit Broadway productions of ”West Side Story,” “Bye Bye Birdie” and “Chicago,” among others. The Times obituary is full of information, though it skirts over what I recall as being a particularly cruel career blow, when Rivera was passed over for the role of Anita in the film version of “West Side Story” for Rita Moreno, even though Rivera had won a Tony for her performance in the role on stage. It also doesn’t mention an unusual altruistic act by Rivera when she was co-starring with Dick Van Dyke and Paul Lynde in the 1960 musical, “Bye Bye Birdie.”
Ethics Alarms 