The Ethics Alarms 2023 “It’s A Wonderful Life” Ethics Guide, With A New Introduction

/ Jack Marshall / 4 Comments

2023 INTRODUCTION

It’s time again for the Ethics Alarms annual posting of its ethics guide to perhaps the best ethics movie ever made, Frank Capra’s now iconic “It’s a Wonderful Life.” Past time, in fact: last year I concluded that the movie really belonged in the Thanksgiving movie canon, not Christmas. However, as I wrote in the 2022 preface,

 Like George, I often feel like I didn’t achieve and experience what I could have, that my choices too often didn’t pan out, that I barely missed the breaks that I needed when I most needed them…What makes our lives successful (or not), and what makes makes our existence meaningful is not how much money we accumulate, or how much power we wield, or how famous we are. What matters is how we affect the lives of those who share our lives, and whether we leave our neighborhood, communities, associations and nation better or worse than it would have been “if we had never been born.” It’s a tough lesson, and some of us, perhaps most, never learn it…I’m not sure I have learned it yet, to be honest with myself. Intellectually, perhaps, but not emotionally.

I have to admit that I still haven’t genuinely accepted the lesson of the film. Maybe it’s time to watch it again; I haven’t since last year, and recently I’ve been feeling a bit too much like George to get up the courage. I’m posting this the day after my birthday, an all-time low for the number of friends, colleagues and relatives who remembered it (five, and my wife didn’t recall until mid-morning, with my son remembering around 10 pm), cards (one) and gifts (none). I don’t care about any of those things really, but I once believed that with as much ability and talent I had been lucky enough to be born with, and the additional advantages of wonderful parents and citizenship in the United States, I would have achieved enough that, oh, I don’t know, I might have earned a Wikipedia page by now. It’s stupid; I know it is. This is a tough time for my business and my family, and a lot of the problems are the result of my own selfish choices and mistakes as well as my hard-wired proclivity to cause trouble and not back down after the consequences start becoming clear. I’m seriously considering not celebrating Christmas this year, and we have always been a big Christmas family, because several recent disasters  require the money to go elsewhere.

And yet, as I have been musing about all of this lately, I cannot deny that I, like George, have had a wonderful life, and, frankly, one that has been a lot more interesting and varied than George’s was. My various crazy projects and eventually defunct missions have been responsible for many marriages and many children, and now grandchildren. I’ve inspired some people to take risks that panned out well for them, and have advanced the careers of several artists. I’ve made a lot of people laugh. There are some plays and musical being performed more frequently now that my theater company rescued from obscurity, and, weirdest of all, a student theater organization that I started is about to celebrate its 50th anniversary. And, of course, there is my son, who we adopted from a hell-hole in Russia and who is making the most of his opportunities in the land of opportunity.

It’s not a bad legacy. I’m not heading to the bridge, but I need to snap out of this mood…cue Cher!

I guess it is time for me to watch “It’s a Wonderful Life” again….

1. “If It’s About Ethics, God Must Be Involved”

Continue reading →

Ethics Quiz: The Star’s Apology

/ Jack Marshall / 6 Comments

Last month, actress Susan Sarandon became a deserving casualty of the Hamas-Israel Ethics Train Wreck after she spoke at at a pro-Palestinian rally and said that American Jews feeling threatened by the pro-Hamas protesters, demonstrators and rioters (like the Cornell students who had to hide in their dorms)were “getting a taste of what it feels like to be a Muslim in this country, so often subjected to violence.” This epically stupid comment got her dropped by United Talent Agency, whose management is Jewish. As I noted here, “the agency concluded, probably accurately, that Sarandon’s comments diminished her value to them, and perhaps having a pro-terrorism client might deter more rational artists from seeking their aid.”

Apparently Sarandon, who has progressed through her romantic lead stage into and out of her mother role stage and now is getting grandmother parts isn’t quite ready to hang up her acting spurs, and decided that she had made a potential career-ending mistake that needed fixing. So she has now issued this apology:

Your first Ethics Alarms Ethics Quiz of December is…

Is her apology sincere, trustworthy, and sufficient?

Continue reading →

Ethics Dunce: The Federalist

/ Jack Marshall / 17 Comments

I could easily make this an Unethical Quote of the Month post too.

I had fondly hoped that I had written my last sentence about the disgusting blight on the republic that calls himself “George Santos,” but no: I just read the ethics-free, Machiavellian, “the ends justify the mean” protest by The Federalist titled, “George Santos’ Expulsion Is Further Proof The GOP Is A Potemkin Political Party.” One of the supposed media flagships of conservative thought has announced that if the Republican Party really cared about conservative principles, it would happily allow a dishonest, untrustworthy, and stunningly dumb Congressman elected under false pretenses remain in Congress under their banner, because they need him to “tackle” the “aforementioned”crises plaguing the country.”

It is a disgusting, indefensible, unethical position, demonstrating that the Democratic Party’s ethics rot has spread. Consider these excerpts:

Continue reading →

As Long As We’re Focused On Throwing Unethical And Unqualified People Out Of Bodies Where They Don’t Belong: Meet Bishop Talbert W. Swan II!

/ Jack Marshall / 1 Comment

(He’s the one on the right, next to the Native American…)

Bishop Talbert W. Swan II, the president of the Springfield, Mass., chapter of the NAACP, wrote on social media regarding Israel’s military response to the Hamas terror attack, “Who would’ve thought that in 2023 Jewish soldiers would be the nazis carrying out ethnic cleansing?” Later, he said, “This isn’t a WAR, it’s a HOLOCAUST.” In a sermon this month, Swan excused the Hamas murder of civilians, children and infants, saying “Violence is the language of the unheard.”

Oh…I forgot to mention that Swan is a member of….wait for it!…. the Massachusetts Task Force on Hate Crimes. I’d say that a Hamas terrorist attack on Jewish citizens qualifies as a hate crime if anything does, wouldn’t you? But I’m not enough of an authority to serve on a blue-ribbon task force. Maybe we shouldn’t assume that members of that task force are necessarily against hate crimes. No, no, I now see that the task force exists to advises the Massachusetts governor on “issues relating to the prevalence, deterrence, and prevention of hate crimes.” That would seem to rule out implying that a terrorist massacre is a good thing, or am I missing something?

Continue reading →

On His Way Out, Rep. Santos Kindly Demonstrates Why

/ Jack Marshall / 9 Comments

The House just voted 311 to 114 (with two cowardly members voting “present”) to make New York Congressman George Santos only the sixth in history to be deemed unworthy of an elected seat. The GOP members mostly supported the draconian punishment despite facing a tough race in the special election Santos’s disgrace now triggers. If I were a voter in that Long Island and Queens district, I’d be tempted to vote for the Democrat just to make the Republican Party pay for allowing a fraud and a crook like Santos to be its nominee. Of course, the Democrats and the local news media also share some blame for not doing due diligence to uncover important facts about a wildly unqualified candidate, but the GOP has to be first in line to be held accountable after Santos himself.

Yesterday, facing his likely humiliation, the biggest phony ever elected to Congress put his essential sliminess on full display, vowing revenge on his party and, like so many villains in movies about conspiracies and corruption, swearing that ‘if I go down, I’ll take all of you down with me!’

“I will do the same thing that members did to me and go to the Office of Congressional Ethics, all throughout today and tomorrow and report, everything that I think is relevant to the committee for them to look into,” said Santos. He’s already promised to file a complaint about the ridiculous Rep. Jamaal Bowman, the Mad Fire Alarmist. Yes, Bowman should be sanctioned, but compared to Santos he’s John Quincy Adams.

Santos’s reaction to being expelled is a stinking pile of rationalizations, as discussed here. His pledge to get revenge is another bit of signature significance. If Santos had any ethical instincts at all, any concept of why he was being kicked out of Congress, any flicker of conscience, dignity, responsibility or decency, he would have exited with a statement expressing his regret for his past actions, apologizing for soiling (well, further soiling) the reputation of the body he was elected to serve in, and promising to devote his future activities to honorable public service, while acknowledging that there is, at this time, no reason to believe him. Then it might have been said of his leaving Congress, in the manner of Malcolm’s description of MacBeth at his execution,

Nothing in his life
Became him like the leaving it.

But George Santos doesn’t possess those character traits: he’s a throbbing sociopath, and unlike more successful sociopaths in our government, he’s not smart or wily enough to hide it.

First Open Ethics Forum Of December! Let’s Have Anthony Fauci Throw Out The First Pitch…

/ Jack Marshall / 24 Comments

Play ball! (The Major League Baseball GM meetings begin this week, meaning that free agent players will be getting contracts that will instantly make them financially secure for life even if they never play an inning. Is this a great country or what?)

Mid-Day Ethics Catch-Up, 11/30/23: “Goodbye November, Glad To See You Go” Edition

/ Jack Marshall / 8 Comments

Nothing of ethical significance has happened on November 30 (so far), but this was an especially rotten month for U.S. ethics, low-lighted, of course, by the not-entirely shocking revelation that the progressive movement has spawned a stunning number of anti-Semitics while out college campuses are churning out eventual graduates who don’t know how to distinguish propaganda from history. Isn’t that nice? My own increasingly embarrassing alma mater, Harvard College, under its diversity-obsessed and cowardly new president, continued its support of terrorism, with the Harvard Crimson picking now to again endorse the the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement devoted to ending international support for Israel’s “oppression” of Palestinians. Now Harvard has joined the ranks of schools being investigated by the Department of Education for civil rights violations of its own students, the Jewish ones, of course. Good.

So what ethics horrors do we have to muse over today?

1. Just because I awarded Chuck Shumer an Ethics Hero award because he isn’t excusing his parties bigots doesn’t change the fact that he is a two-faced partisan hack.. Schumer this week took to the Senate floor to warn that a key funding package with Ukraine aid could collapse over battle Republicans pressing for a “partisan border policy” thereby injecting a “decades-old hyperpartisan issue” into the debate. Since when was enforcing existing laws a partisan issue? Old Ethics Alarms friend Joe Concha was unkind enough to point out on “X” that Schumer said in 2009, “People who enter the United States without our permission are illegal aliens and illegal aliens should not be treated the same as people who enter the U.S. legally. The American people will never accept immigration reform unless they truly believe that their government is committed to ending future illegal immigration.”

2. “Was that wrong? Should I not have done that?” To make a dubious point about school security, Casey Garcia (aided by her 4’11” stature) recorded herself posing as her 13-year-old daughter at San Elizario Middle School and posted the results on social media. She dyed her hair, used skin bronzer, wore a hoodie and had a pandemic-hysteria mask on to pass for her teenage daughter. In the video, Garcia claims to have “exposed the dangers of our schools and I am trying to protect my children and yours. If you want to come after me for that, there’s really nothing else I can say.” Because the real problem in schools is short parents pretending to be students, or something.

Casey was convicted of criminal trespassing, and must perform 100 hours of community service and pay a $700 fine.

Continue reading →

Ethics Hero: Senator Chuck Schumer

/ Jack Marshall / 6 Comments

Schumer, as the nation’s highest ranking elected official of Jewish heritage, is the ideal official to call out the Left’s rampant anti-Semitism that has been exposed since the October 6 Hamas attack on Israel. Doing so involved considerable political risks, and frankly, I didn’t think he had the guts to do it. Yesterday, however, Schumer delivered an impassioned speech in the Senate condemning members of his own party and ideological persuasion for “unknowingly aiding and abetting” anti-Semitism in the name of social justice, and thus fueling bigotry against Jews as Israel battles for its survival against Hamas.

Continue reading →

Hey, I’m Calm! Stuff Like This Doesn’t Bother Me At All. I’m Just An Uninvolved Observer.

/ Jack Marshall / 8 Comments

And happy!

See?

Stories like this one coming up—another Great Stupid epic, again with links to the George Floyd Ethics Train Wreck—have been proliferating lately. When I first saw the headline on a report that D.C.’s black, woke, totally incompetent mayor Muriel Bowser had “re-painted” her insane giant Black Lives Matter mural, confirmation bias kicked in: I read it to mean that she had finally removed the insulting monstrosity by having it painted over. I was even preparing a post about how trying to undo a massive ethics botch often calls attention to what was so wrong in the first place, and that in this case, Bowser was in ethics zugzwang because so many of her residents are still blind Black Lives Matter supporters, aka. anti-white, anti-police, anti-America racists.

But that’s not what the story said. The real story is that Bowser chose now to spruce up the huge, infamous street mural shouting “Black Lives Matter” that she had painted in 2020 as BLM mobs were “mostly peacefully” demonstrating through the city and the nation, at times confronting white D.C. diners and demanding that they pledge fealty to the Marxist movement. The refurbishment cost $271,231, including $217,680 in labor costs and $53,551 in paint supplies.

Continue reading →

Incompetent Elected Official Of The Week: Rep. Roger Williams (R-Tx.)

/ Jack Marshall / 18 Comments

George Santos, the lying, fraudulent, criminal Congressman from New York who was elected to Congress by almost completely fabricating his résumé, is likely to be expelled from the House at the end of this week in a bi-partisan two-thirds vote. Good.

Santos will be the first House member to be jettisoned without having first been convicted of a crime or being a supporter of the Confederacy. The bi-partisan effort is even more remarkable because House Republicans have so small a majority including Santos. But George is special. He is an embarrassment to the party, his district, New York, the House, the nation and his species.

Some Republicans, however, don’t comprehend that “integrity of the institution” stuff. Meet Roger Williams of Texas, who explains why he is not inclined to vote against Santos. noting that he has serious reservations about voting to remove a fellow member and saying, “I think we set a really not a good example if we can just pick and choose who comes and who stays. I don’t agree with what he’s been accused of, but at the same time it’s not our job here in Congress to decide who the congressman in some state or some district is. I just don’t like the idea of that.”

This is the quality of analysis offered by an elected official who helps make our laws. Ugh. Let’s see…

1. Congress isn’t picking and choosing “who comes and who stays.” Congress, like all institutions with any integrity and respectability, is enforcing minimum standards for its members. If it won’t do that—and it usually doesn’t—it forfeits the trust of the public.

2. Not only will Congress be setting a good example by ridding itself of an unqualified, dishonest phony who was elected under false pretenses, it is an essential example that should be repeated more frequently. All Americans, the unfortunate districts that elect unqualified representatives, and Congress itself are harmed when sociopaths like Santos are elected. Citizens should be on alert that if they vote irresponsibly and end up with a toxic representative, he or she might end up being rejected. I can think of at least 10 other members of the House—none quite as bad as Santos, of course—who would benefit Congress by their absence. It’s ridiculous that so few Representatives have been expelled in three centuries.

3. “I don’t agree with what he’s been accused of…” Can you be any more equivocal, Congressman? Santos’s lies about his background are a matter of record. The scathing report from the House Ethics Committee earlier this month concluded after a thorough investigation that he “sought to fraudulently exploit every aspect of his House candidacy for his own personal financial profit.” The fact that Santos also has more than 20 criminal charges pending against him doesn’t even need to come into consideration.

4. Congress isn’t deciding “who the congressman in some state or some district is.” Santos’s New York district will do that in a special election after Santos is metaphorically kicked out the door and down the Capitol steps.

Williams’ rapier-like analysis reveals him as a dim, dim bulb, but at least he might be honest…unlike Rep. Santos.