Category Archives: ethics

This Pretty Much Says It All

Posted on by
Reply

At a Pennsylvania State House Consumer Affairs Committee hearing, solar industry representatives decried the level of State interest in solar energy production relative to more traditional sources of energy production.

[T]he potential for the industry to flourish still exists, said the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA), if only the state revamped some of its policies to incentivize more investment.

And this from SEIA’s Mid-Atlantic Senior Manager of State Affairs, Scott Elias:

Some states have more aggressive goals. Even 2.5% by 2030 would increase the demand in Pennsylvania.

If only the state revamped some of its policies to incentivize. That attitude clearly illustrates solar energy’s dependence on Government for its growth.

When solar energy becomes an actually viable source of energy, the industry won’t need government “incentives;” the free market will drive interest and facilitate industry growth.

What Biden’s Afghan Job Well Done Looks Like

Posted on by
Reply

Ambassador Kelley Eckels Currie, former US ambassador-at-large for global women’s issues:

Currie’s group organized buses to take roughly 700 Afghans, women and their families, to the [Kabul] airport, maintaining communications with the State Department, vetting the evacuees in advance and sharing passenger lists for the buses.
“The State Department was aware of the groups we were trying to assist,” Currie said. “I was told that this information had been raised at the highest levels; we had very senior people reaching out to State leadership.”
That included at least one message sent to Secretary of State Antony Blinken, she said. And she personally wrote a note to Undersecretary of State for Management Ambassador John Bass.
Authorities told the group to wait in a staging facility for 24 hours before the State Department reversed course and said it couldn’t help fly them out.

Those women remain stranded, abandoned by President Joe Biden’s team.

And this:

Taliban supporters in Afghanistan holding a mock funeral while hoisting coffins draped with flags from the US and other NATO countries.

None of this counts the hundreds (thousands?) of Americans Biden also has stranded—abandoned—in Afghanistan.

These represent the victory of which Biden, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, JCS Chief General Mark Milley are so proud of accomplishing.

Thought Police

Posted on by
Reply

They’re metastasizing into the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention published a guide to “inclusive language” in order to promote “health equity” and “inclusive communication.”

For instance, their “Corrections & Detentions” section “suggests”

replacing terms such as “Inmate,” “Prisoner,” “Convict/ex-convict,” and “Criminal” with terms such as “People/persons,” “Persons in pre-trial or with charge,” “Persons on parole or probation,” or “People in immigration detention facilities.”

The problem with euphemisms, though, is that they mean precisely the same as the word they’re intended to replace. Persons on parole or probation still are criminals. That’s the status of folks on parole or probation—they’re still criminals, felons, until they complete their sentences. People in immigration detention facilities remain illegal aliens—that’s why they’re being detained.

The substitutes may soften the language in a misguided attempt to disguise or obfuscate the facts, but that’s only a temporary condition, and the frankness of the underlying meaning ultimately (and quickly) comes through. That’s why there’s a constant search for euphemisms.

The problem with government agents—the men and women who populate government agencies—being the ones pushing for euphemisms is that their push becomes mandates, and government mandates are nothing more than restrictions on free speech, limits on one of our most basic individual liberties. When government agents presume to dictate how we must term concepts, they’re dictating how we must think about them.

Even the worthies in government know that. Which is maybe why they’re making their push.

Government Fiat

Posted on by
Reply

This is what the Progressive-Democrats in charge of our Federal Government are plotting [sic] in the way of drug pricing under Medicare Part D (the drug provision of Medicare), per the Tax Foundation.

Under HR 3 [the Elijah Cummings Lower Drug Costs Now Act], if drug manufacturers do not agree to participate in negotiations, or do not agree to the negotiated price, they would be subject to an escalating excise tax on the sale of the drug in question. The tax would kick in at 65 percent and would rise by 10 percentage points each 90 days the manufacturers are in “noncompliance,” reaching a maximum tax rate of 95%.

What “negotiation?” This is the price we’re negotiating for, says the Health and Human Services Secretary, the Government official that HR3 says will represent the Government.

Here’s our counteroffer, says the drug manufacturer.

No, no, that’s too high, says SecHHS, repeating his original offer. Then he says, Here’s your noncompliance tax.

This isn’t negotiation, yet that’s what will occur, with the Government holding all the cards. Targeted drug manufacturers and sellers would not even be allowed to opt out of Medicare under HR3.

The Tax Foundation is concerned about drug innovation, and rightly so.

I’m also concerned about the fate of free enterprise and of individual freedom.

Maybe It’s Time

Posted on by
Reply

Sergeant Major of the Army Michael Grinston had this on the importance of “diversity and inclusion” relative to combat capability:

Diversity is a number—do you have people that don’t look or think like you in the room? Inclusion is listening and valuing those people[.]

Our army’s Training and Doctrine Command, via its official twitter account had this:

Inclusion & Diversity is what makes our [U.S. Army] better.

No. What makes our army—our military establishment in general—is whether we have soldiers and formations of soldiers who are capable, in defense of our nation and when called of our friends and allies, of successfully engaging, pursuing, and killing our enemies’ soldiers, our enemies’ formations, our enemies’ capability of mounting further attacks.

That’s also who we should see “in the room.” And no one else. Diversity will fall out of that, if we do a proper job of training for combat, rather than for political correctness. Every combat or combat support training graduate will be included—and that’s the inclusiveness that we need.

Our current military management’s (we seem to have a serious lack of leadership) emphasis on “diversity and inclusion” for their own sake, as epitomized by Grinston, is divisive, it’s stinking racism and sexism.

Grinston had the…political correctness…to make his claim against the backdrop of the travesty exploding in Afghanistan. About that contrast, Marine veteran Jessie Jane Duff is on the right track [emphasis hers].

This is what matters: 11 Marines and one Navy Corpsman killed. Americans.
I’m positive they didn’t look or think like you, Sergeant Major. Every flag drapped coffin looks the same.
We have an #AfghanistanCrisis and this is your tweet. Shameful.

Maybe it’s time to clear out the foolish and the idiotic who choose not to understand what it takes to have an effective military. Maybe it’s time to discharge or retire our military managers, from the Secretary of Defense and JCS Chief on down through most of the flag and GS equivalents in the Pentagon.