Leading by Example
Bernie Sanders has been adamant over the whole $15/hr minimum wage thing. A must! We've got to do it. So it was a surprise when a labor dispute arose among his campaign staff because he wasn't paying them $15/hour. Wait ... what? Sanders (a millionaire) has been lecturing WalMart, McDonald's, and the like that they need to pay their people more; he has been reticent to do the same. So, his solution to fix the problem now that it's out in the open? Well, Bernie will now limit the amount of time his organizers can work in order to pay them the required wage. He calls it "better hours" for his staff. Pay them $15/hour, but give them fewer hours. All fixed! "There’s nothing 'extreme' about raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour," Bernie tweeted. True, as long as you consider decreased work and decreased production with higher cost of labor not "extreme."
Dear Mr. Sanders, please tell me you understand that this will be the requirement of every business in the country if they are to meet the demand. The payroll doesn't magically appear; they will need to cut hours or personnel or service, or they will need to pass the cost on to consumers. In all cases the consumers will pay. In no case will prices decrease or the economy flourish. Tell me you know this.
Heaping It On
Because Mr. Trump didn't want to release his tax returns and because so many abhor Mr. Trump to his very core, California has made it a law that if you want to be on their primary ballot, you will release your taxes. The Constitution doesn't require it. Federal law doesn't require it. But, doggone it, we're going to require it of Mr. Trump just because we can. Hey, while we're at it, we'd also like to know your SSN, your bank account numbers, and your passwords. Because we can. (I wonder if Governor Newsom released his tax returns before becoming governor.) (To be fair, there are other states, too. California just made the news this week.)
Church and State
This was news to me. Apparently there is a "sacred space where America gathers at moments of national significance." The "faith leaders" of that space (the so-called "National Cathedral") are complaining about the president and the American people. I wasn't aware that "faith leaders" were allowed to have a voice in American government or politics. I must have missed something. And isn't it odd that I, the religious guy, disagrees that there is a "sacred space where America gathers"?
Hate Crime on the Rise
Hate crime is bad. We all agree on that. So the recent report that hate crime in 2018 saw a national increase is bad news. I would, however, urge people to keep things in perspective. First, there is the constant redefinition of what constitutes a "hate crime." As an example, racist graffiti used to be racist graffiti; now it's a hate crime. Using the wrong gender pronoun used to be a matter of opinion; now it's a hate crime. I read of one case where someone left bacon in a public park in New York City and it was classified as a hate crime. With more things classified as hate crimes, it is absolutely necessary that hate crimes will increase. Second, the more we stoke the outrage, the more sensitized people become. What was once "That's just them; ignore them and they'll go away" is now a call for a hanging for hate. It increases hate-crime sensitivity. Hate crime is bad, but we shouldn't expect to see a decrease when we increase the numbers of things so classified and we increase the sensitivity to it.
And Why Not?
"Marriage is the union of a man and a woman for life." Traditionally -- historically -- marriage was clear. That is, until the 21st century when a tiny segment of the population set out to redefine it for everyone. Well, perhaps "redefine" isn't accurate. More like "undefine" because, while it doesn't mean what it used to mean, neither is it clear what it does mean. So "same-sex" can now be stuck to "marriage" but polygamy or polyamory cannot. For reasons unknown. "Because we said so!" I guess. But having uprooted "marriage" from its moorings, it only stands to reason that it would continue its slide. (Thus the term, "slippery slope.") As when this British woman married her dog on daytime TV. No, it wasn't real. No, it wasn't even legal. But, why not? On what basis do they disallow "this" and not "that"? "Excuse me. Your solid footing is slipping." This is what we get when there is no firm foundation.
Principled
A South Korean man sat in a car in front of the Japanese embassy and set himself on fire to protest Japan's tightening of export controls for high-tech materials. Actor Mario Lopez in an interview with Candace Owens suggested that 3-year-olds shouldn't be turned transgender because the child says he thinks he's a girl; parents should try parenting instead. And the social media goes wild, altering his Wikipedia page to call him "transphobic" and shouting out threats and insults from the anonymous safety of the Internet. So ... who was really serious about their protest?
That's Just Weird
President Trump is hated by the masses. Everyone knows that. No one doubts it. So why is it that his approval rating reached a new high mark recently after his "racist tweet" urging congresswomen who hate the country to "go back" to their own countries. Why is it that his current approval rating is the same as Barack Obama in his "July of the third year"? I'm not a Trump fan, but I don't get this.
6 comments:
People can debate whether the early books of the Old Testament preach henotheism. But there is no debate over whether characters in those books believed that way. Some of them written about there worried that in their travel away from Judah and Israel into the neighboring lands of competing deities, Yahweh's power would diminish.
(This pertains to your "sacred place" comment.)
Can't imagine how anyone could hold that anything in Scripture teaches henotheism. All of Scripture teaches monotheism. My "sacred place" comment (or, rather the quotes around the term) indicate that I don't believe we have such things or, rather, that God recognizes them, and I don't believe we get the option to make things sacred; that's His job.
Not sure how sacred places of the Old Testament and America's sacred places are anywhere near related.
If CA is allowed to impose an arbitrary and partisan extra constitutional requirement for ballot access, then its official that elections are meaningless. This opens the door to exclude any candidate for any reason. N
David, you're right, but, in a sense, that's the point. The actual sacred spaces from the Old Testament were ordained by God, not Man. Spaces that we deem "sacred" are questionable at best. Anonymous's "henotheism" (where the "sacred space" is the family unit) is just such a questionable (read "false") sacred space.
Exactly, Craig. Actually, I question the constitutionality of controlling the ballot by making laws that are aimed to exclude the candidates they don't want.
I completely agree that the CA actions are constitutionally dubious. They are clearly disenfranchising a segment of their citizens. Unfortunately they have the 9th Circus so it might take a while to overturn this foolishness.
Of course they’re too myopic to understand that these things cut both ways.
Post a Comment