Pages

Wednesday, February 26, 2014

The Daily News Byte


                This is an interesting blog that goes at the heart of private business being forced to offer their services to homosexual wedding ceremonies. The news has recently been riddled with stories about the oppression of homosexual couples that are just looking to obtain equal rights as heterosexuals. The typically accusations brought against mostly Christian organizations is that they are denying these people their rights and are then being brought to court. What this blog gets at is that none of these businesses have ever discriminated against gay people because they are gay. Most of them have been good contributors to society, but just don't want their products affiliated with an act they find sinful. As businesses have said, they are more than happy to make baked goods or take photos of gay's, they morally cannot use their resources for the wedding ceremonies. The connection homosexuals make with blacks is disconnected because homosexuals are being served all across the country by Christians and Christian organizations. People of color were refused not because they wanted someone to advertise, but specifically because of their skin color. So they received no service at all. Now, homosexuals are getting the law on their side and carving out special privilege. A bakery might supply cakes to a KKK member, but it should possess the right to refuse to bake for a rally.

                When a President leaves office, they are able to have their records sealed for up to 12 years. For President Clinton, that ended in 2013. So far, the records have not been released to the public but it appears most of the archive is scheduled to be released. The Clintons, as well as President Obama, may be able to make a case for keeping certain records sealed. This will likely set up a court battle should Hillary decide to run for President, and will likely give a Republican contender some ammunition claiming that she has something to hide. Which is no doubt the case, some of the papers may be sensitive or classified, but others have the possibility to rehash old controversies from the Clinton years. We'll have to see what sort of things are released

                Due to the massive failings of just about everything the Democrats have put into place, the mid-term elections could be a disaster for them. So, in order to mount their defense, they have decided to target women voters. By using the same rhetoric as always, Democratic campaign strategies will be adjusted to focus on targeting women and promising higher wages and more benefits. The typical promise offered by Washington. Many studies have been done on income inequality among the genders, and depending on who you read, it's a big issue or it's mostly a myth. There is sometimes a difference in pay between a man and a woman in the same job, but that does not necessarily mean it's inequality. Currently, the highest earners are typically male, so the overall income goes to men. Also, more women stay at home with children than do men, so the gap widens. Also, typically, women don't have as much time in the workforce due to children. Also, insurance costs for women are higher because they typically require more services and businesses account for things like maternity leave (one of the promises by Washington is to extend that leave time). Check out some more on the topic at Forbes

                Ah Joe Biden, such a respected politician and a clear thinker before he speaks. Wait, I think I've got that wrong.  He is of course the blabbering fool. His latest accusation is claiming the Voter ID law in South Carolina is based on 'hatred' and not helping to reduce voter fraud. One thing is always sure, Democrats say there is no fraud and Republicans say there is. Biden of course references this as being a step backwards for civil rights. The democrats were also dealt a blow by the Supreme Court when it struck down critical elements of the Voting Rights Act. So it must then be a conspiracy between the Republicans and the Supreme Court, because you know, those two are always in sync (not). All South Carolina is asking for is some way to identify voters, seems pretty simple to me, so that people can't go in multiple times under false names. But of course, the Democrats, who claim to be for the poor, are calling this discrimination against those who don't have government issued ID's.  So, here's the choice, let people fraud the system or some people might have a harder time voting.

                With the new Presidential budget to be released, the President has called an end to the "Age of Austerity." This is hard to read without falling on the floor laughing, or wrenching in pain. Since Obama took office, deficits have skyrocketed. As Michael Tanner points out, "the real Obama debt increase has been more than $4.7 trillion." If that's his version of austerity, I don't want to know what he thinks are appropriate for regular spending. The only deficit cutting that was accomplished came through the sequester, which everyone blasted and now Washington is trying to undo. So, who knows what sort of soaring deficits await us, since Obama's massive debt increase was his version of 'austerity.'


                I don't know how many people who read this have ever been to Alaska. I have and it's beautiful. Probably the most beautiful place I've ever been. There aren't many requests that come out of this state for federal assistance (that I know of) so when people in a remote village ask for the ability to make an emergency road to get to an airport, you would think that would be fine. However, their efforts have been shut down because of the wildlife that inhabit the area. The Secretary of the Interior has blocked efforts for this road and is essentially putting the safety of animals above the inhabitants of this small town. They make it sound like if they build this road there will be no more wildlife refuge, when in reality that's pretty much all Alaska is. People in the small town have died in part because they were unable to evacuate because there is no access to a road and the little airport can't handle the storms. So, I think it's time for the families who have lost loved ones to send pictures of those they lost, along with a bird picture and ask, "which is more important to protect?"

4 comments:

  1. Perhaps citing something over than the Cato Institute or Fox news would make this drivel seem like it actually had more substance. That's doubtful, though.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I would prefer that if you are to make a comment, make one that is actually constructive instead of bashing.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Because your post was definitely constructive and not bashing. Oh, wait...

    ReplyDelete
  4. I would say it is in some ways primarily because it's responding to current events. Your comment was to just not cite Cato or Fox. No interaction, so not constructive. If you have something to say about those particular links you can. Anyway, my blog, my rules. If you don't like them, don't read it.

    ReplyDelete