Showing posts with label government. Show all posts
Showing posts with label government. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 12, 2025

Trump Is Squandering the Greatest Gift of the Manhattan Project; The New York Times, August 12, 2025

 Garrett M. Graff , The New York Times; Trump Is Squandering the Greatest Gift of the Manhattan Project

"The Manhattan Project was a towering achievement, one of the great stories of human effort and accomplishment. Yet the Trump administration has been systematically dismantling the culture of research that the Manhattan Project and World War II bequeathed us, a culture that propelled American prosperity.

At no other time in modern history has a country so thoroughly turned its back on its core national strengths. The very elements that made the Manhattan Project such a success are today under assault. With devastating cuts to science and health research, the administration is turning its back on a history of being powered and renewed by the innovation and vision of immigrants. What America may find is that we have squandered the greatest gift of the Manhattan Project — which, in the end, wasn’t the bomb but a new way of looking at how science and government can work together."

Wednesday, March 21, 2018

Ben Carson Defends Buying $31,000 Dining Set to Congress: ‘I Left It to My Wife’; New York Times, March 20, 2018

Glenn Thrush, New York Times; Ben Carson Defends Buying $31,000 Dining Set to Congress: ‘I Left It to My Wife’

[Kip Currier: HUD Secretary Ben Carson's statement in the excerpt below is the money quote take-away from this article.

Ethics is not only about the substantive impacts of actions but also about how those actions look to other people: The messages--both spoken and unspoken--that  our actions communicate about our own values.

A phrase often heard regarding ethical issues is "air of impropriety", meaning that an action has a sense of not seeming "right", of not being "above board", of not looking good. Even if an action may technically be legal or ethical.

Good ethical decision-making includes consideration of our own internal compasses and the external signals that our actions send to other people. Not just in the current buzzphrase sense of "the optics" of something, but what we are communicating about our priorities and values.

Ethical leadership--especially public service--is concerned with promoting trust in the integrity of our leaders, our institutions, our democratic values and ideals. Being mindful about how something looks--the example we set for others--is an integral component of ethical leadership. That's worth thinking about.]


"On Tuesday, Mr. Carson defended that decision, saying that his son had not profited from his father’s government post.

“HUD’s ethics counsel suggested it might look funny, but I’m not a person who spends a lot of time thinking about how something looks,” Mr. Carson said."

Wednesday, June 7, 2017

Trump doesn’t understand how to be president. The Comey story shows why.; Washington Post, June 7, 2017

E.J. Dionne Jr., Washington Post; Trump doesn’t understand how to be president. The Comey story shows why.

"Here are the things Trump still doesn’t get: (1) Comey is his own person concerned with his own reputation and standing. (2) A president, unlike a despot, can’t unilaterally change the rules that surround a legal investigation. (3) People in government don’t work only for the president; their primary obligation is to the public. (4) Personal relationships matter a great deal in government, but they aren’t everything; Comey could not go soft on Michael Flynn just because Trump likes Flynn or fears what Flynn might say. (5) Because of 1, 2, 3 and 4, Comey was not going to do what Trump asked, even if this meant being fired...

There has been a lively debate among Trump critics about whether he’s dangerous because he’s inclined toward authoritarianism or because he’s incompetent. The Comey episode allows us to reach a higher synthesis in this discussion: Trump is incompetent precisely because he believes he can act like an autocrat in a constitutional democracy. This doesn’t work, and it makes him do stupid things."

Friday, January 29, 2010

[Podcast] Can Bosses Do That? As It Turns Out, Yes They Can; NPR, Morning Edition, 1/29/10

[Podcast] NPR, Morning Edition; Can Bosses Do That? As It Turns Out, Yes They Can:

http://www.npr.org/templates/player/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=123024596&m=123098924

Article Link and Excerpt from Lewis Maltby's (2010) book, "Can They Do That?: Retaking Our Fundamental Rights in the Workplace":

"Did you know you could be fired for not removing a political sticker from your car — or even having a beer after work? Lewis Maltby says it's more than possible — it's happened. His new book, Can They Do That? explores rights in the workplace.

As he tells NPR's Ari Shapiro, "Freedom of speech is protected by the First Amendment — but only where the government is concerned.

"What most Americans generally don't know is that the Constitution doesn't apply to private corporations at all."

In terms of monitoring its employees, the list of things a corporation can't do is a short one — it's basically confined to eavesdropping on a personal oral conversation, Maltby said. "Anything else is open season."

And outside the workplace, personal blogs or social media pages on services like Twitter or Facebook offer no refuge.

Asked if workers can be fired for things they write on those sites, Maltby said, "Absolutely. Happens every day.""

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=123024596