What did you think the threadline meant?
Glenn Beck interviews from lesbians who disagree with the gay fascist left. [Edited for brevity and emphasis added to the really important bit that only a complete smeghead would disagree with.]
The lesbian couple are standing up for Christian t-shirt maker Blaine Adamson, who refused to print shirts for a gay pride festival because it compromised his values. Adamson has come under attack for his stance, but this couple supports him. The story is a microcosm for what should be happening in America as we navigate the way the world is changing.
“As a business owner, it struck a chord with me when I read the story, because I know how hard it is to build a business. You put your blood and your sweat and your tears into every bit of it. When I put myself in his place, I immediately felt like if that were to happen to us, I couldn’t create or print anti-gay T-shirts, you know, for a group. I couldn’t do it,” Kathy explained.
Diane added, “We feel this really isn’t a gay or straight issue. This is a human issue. No one really should be forced to do something against what they believe in. It’s as simple as that, and we feel likewise. If we were approached by an organization such as the Westboro Baptist Church, I highly doubt we would be doing business with them.”“Everybody votes with their dollars, you know?” Kathy said. “And why you would want to go with somebody who doesn’t agree with you, [when] there’s others who do agree with you, that’s who I want to do business with.”
Nice. If only all gay people were so tolerant and open-minded.
Hat Tip: Papa Giorgio
The last piano bar in West Hollywood is closing, it just wasn’t possible to turn a profit while complying with onerous state and local regulations. The Progressive City Government of West Hollywood required the cabaret to comply with a number of perfectly reasonable “common sense” regulations that assuredly existed only to ensure the public’s best interests.
The city did allow DTM to have singing waiters, so long as there were no more than six of them performing at any time. Occasional guest singers, including people from the audience, also were allowed. DTM also was barred from having a cover charge or requiring the purchase of a minimum number of drinks, which are typical revenue sources for cabarets.
Last month, I derided Jay Carney’s denial that employers have begun to avoid full-time employees and use more part-time employees, due to Obamacare. Carney claimed, “The data reflects that there is not support for the proposition…”
The July government employment report released Friday showed…that part-time work accounted for almost all the job growth that’s been reported over the past six months…
“Over the last six months, of the net job creation, 97 percent of that is part-time work,” said Keith Hall, a senior researcher at George Mason University’s Mercatus Center. “That is really remarkable.”
…Over the past six months…the Household Survey shows 963,000 more people reporting that they were employed, and 936,000 of them reported they’re in part-time jobs.
Other articles say that it isn’t 97%, it’s only 77%. But either way, the Obama ‘recovery’ has shown a truly unprecedented skew to part-time employment. By the government’s own data.
The next question is, why? Is that skew because of the incentive (to use part-time workers) that arises from Obamacare’s employer mandate?
As I explained earlier: even if a formal study hasn’t been done yet, the anecdotal (i.e., first-hand) reports of Obamacare’s mandate causing it are so widespread among businesses that even the Federal Reserve has noticed. Anecdotal evidence isn’t proof, but it can be indicative. The proposition may not be proven, but only a paid liar-for-Obama would refuse to consider it seriously, Mr. Jay Carney.
Over at Forbes, Chris Conover considers the proposition seriously, including lefties’ criticisms. Good reading. His conclusion is like mine: Maybe the proposition hasn’t been proven yet in a study…but, come on: it’s early days, there is both logic and evidence for it in plenty, and the counter-arguments rest on “weak reeds”.
Bonus items, as long as we’re talking about jobs:
- Obama is happy to hand out Obamacare waivers to people that he needs to reward, court or buy off; now including Capitol Hill.
- Hundreds of millions invested in “green jobs training”: still nothing to show for it.
- By some calculations, 40% of American workers make less than the 1968 minimum wage, in real terms. Not that I favor raising the minimum wage, but it shows how far we’ve fallen.
UPDATE: More data.
Something odd is happening to the workweek…Even as the number of people working has grown by 2.2 million, or 1.6%, over the past year, the number clocking 30 to 34 hours a week has shrunk…By comparison, the number working 25-29 hours per week in their primary job rose…This oddity has an obvious explanation: ObamaCare’s employer mandate applies only to full-time workers, which the law defines as 30 hours per week.
RTWT, for details.
I could talk about Lance Armstrong’s recent shameless exploitation of his prior shameless lying, but y’all know I like the economic topics. And one aspect of honesty is, calling things by their right name. To his credit, Whole Foods CEO John Mackey recently called Obamacare by its right name:
Mackey told NPR[,] “Socialism is where the government owns the means of production. In fascism, the government doesn’t own the means of production, but they do control it — and that’s what’s happening with our health care programs and these reforms.”
Of course that set off the howling spree, and now we have a partial climbdown:
“I made a bad choice of language,” Mackey said on WNYC’s Brian Lehrer Show… I was trying to distinguish it between socialism so I took the dictionary definition of fascism, which is when the means of production are still owned privately but the government controls it — that’s a type of fascism. However, I realize that that word has so much baggage associated with it…So I do regret using that word…
Funny: Leftists never seem to regret it, when they use the word.
But Mackey rightly emphasizes the positive: “What I do believe in is free enterprise capitalism, and I’d like to see our healthcare system really unleash [its] power…” – Nice to hear that.
For more insight into why economic growth in anemic and job creation is stagnant, take a gander at a poll released last “week by the National Association of Manufacturers and the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB)“:
The national survey, conducted between Aug. 13 and Sept. 4, interviewed 800 small business owners and manufacturers and found that 69 percent of them think President Barack Obama’s policies have hurt American businesses and manufacturers, and 55 percent would not start a business today given the current environment.
. . . .
The survey showed that small business owners and manufacturers think federal regulations, taxes, government spending and the costs of health insurance and energy are the main causes of slow economic growth.
Small businesses generate the most new jobs. If we want to see job growth, federal, state and local governments need reduce their spending and scale back on their regulations.
While I was celebrating a friend’s birthday yesterday at the happiest place on earth (with seemingly fewer happy people this summer than in past years), Glenn Reynolds linked and quoted from a blogger who offered a nice succinct, synopsis of an emerging consensus on the Chick-Fil-A hullabaloo:
Among pretty much everyone with a civil libertarian, or just plain libertarian, background, the verdict on the Chick-Fil-A furor is the same: while private persons and groups are within their rights to boycott a business, it’s outrageous and dangerous for government officials to threaten to use regulation to keep the fast-food chain out of their cities because they disapprove of its president’s anti-gay-marriage views.
Exactly. Exactly. Read the whole thing.
Do wonder yet again why Democratic politicians were so eager to attack this private company for the opinions of its president. And to do so when they had no evidence that the company had ever discriminated against an employee because he was gay or denied service to or otherwise denigrated a customer because of his sexual orientation.