In a conciliatory move by the Obama administration, the president has asked the U. S. Board on Geographical Names to name the fault line beneath Haiti after the 43rd president of the United States, George W. Bush. This particular fracture in the tectonic plate will henceforth be called "Bush's Fault."
By Nick Collins, Published: 7:33AM GMT 12 Feb 2010, The Telegraph.Co.UK
It has often been claimed that avoiding red meat is beneficial to the environment, because it lowers emissions and less land is used to produce alternatives.
But a study by Cranfield University, commissioned by WWF, the environmental group, found a substantial number of meat substitutes – such as soy, chickpeas and lentils – were more harmful to the environment because they were imported into Britain from overseas.(link)
Comment: I just had to share this. No further comment.
Earlier this week a mosque was vandalized here in Nashville. The walls and windows were spray painted with slogans such as "Muslims go home" and crosses were spray painted on the building. Also a threatening and hate filled note was left behind.
I condemn and deplore this act of hate just as I would the burning of a cross in the yard of a black family or the painting of a swastika on a synagogue.
I want our intelligence community being vigilant in tracking down terrorist. I recognize there is a greater threat of a terrorist being a Muslim than there is he being a Methodist. I support common sense profiling. I support people learning about Islam. I recognize that some youth have been radicalized by the teachings of some Muslim clerics.
At the same time, we must be mindful that the religion of Islam is not the enemy. There are nations of the world where Muslims and Hindus, Muslims and Buddhist, and Muslims and Christians live together in peace. The nation of Turkey is a democratic, tolerant, Muslim nation. Our allies and the countries we are defending and supporting in Afghanistan and Iraq are Muslim nations. It was Afghans that we armed that defeated Communist Russia and greatly contributed to the end of the communist era. They were Muslims. In the complicated Bosnian war, the US intervened stopping the slaughter of Muslims by the Christians.
Muslims are not our enemy; our enemy are Muslim. We are not at war with Islam. We need to be careful to avoid creating a climate that makes it OK to vandalize Mosques.
As I have stated in other post on this blog, my faith in the science of global warming has been shaken by the exposed fraud of climategate, glaciergate revelations of IPCC scientist unable to do simple subtraction and division, and the emergence of responsible dissenting voices. Nevertheless, I am not sure. I am still waiting for the scientific community to purge crooks and incompetents and convince me the science is real.
Assuming however that the science is valid, what to we do about it? The most promising approach to combat global warming would be straight forward revenue-neutral carbon tax. There is no appetite for that. There is a proposal that would be almost as good.
Maria Cantwell, a Democratic senator from Washington has offered a cap and dividend bill. This except from an article appearing in The Economist, explains how it would work.
Under her bill, the government would impose a ceiling on carbon emissions each year. Producers and importers of fossil fuels will have to buy permits. The permits would be auctioned, raising vast sums of money. Most of that money would be divided evenly among all Americans. The bill would raise energy prices, of course, and therefore the price of everything that requires energy to make or distribute. But a family of four would receive perhaps $1000 a year, which would more than make up for it, reckons Ms Cantwell. Cap-and-dividend would set a price on carbon, thus giving Americans a powerful incentive to burn less dirty fuel. It would also raise the rewards for investing in clean energy. And it would leave all but the richest 20% of Americans—who use the most energy—materially better off, she says.
Robert left a comment on my last post and quoted Media Matters that said that it is a myth that Card Check would end the secret ballot in unionizing elections. Robert is technically correct. The secret ballot would not be prohibited but it would, for all practical purposes, be eliminated.
Here are how things work now: Union organizers ask workers to sign cards indicating an interest in an election to vote on forming a union. Once 30% of the employees have signed cards, the union can petition the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to hold a secret ballot election. Both the union and the employer are given the opportunity to argue their case with employees and then workers vote in a federally supervised election. If the union gets more than 50% of the votes, it is certified by the NLRB and the employer must begin collective bargaining.
Here is how it would work under card check: Once Unions get 30% of the workers to sign a card, they could still petition the NLRB to hold a secret ballot vote. The Company would lose the right to request a secret ballot election. If labor gets more than 30% of the employees to sign a card but less than 50%, NLRB could order an election. Once the union organizers get one more than 50% of the employees to sign a card, the NLRB would be required to certify the union and be prohibited from ordering a secret ballot election. There would be no restriction on when or where workers could be solicited to sign a card. The union organizer could come to a workers home at night and ask them to sign. Union organizers could go back to any worker who does not sign and ask them over and over until they do sign.
So, while it would not ban the secret ballot, you can see that it would effectively eliminate it.
To verify that the above summary is correct please research it for yourself. While I do not think Wikipedia is an authoritative source, I often think they are a handy reference to understand an issue. If you want to know more you may want to start there. (link)
Card-check is the system that would replace the secret ballot in determining if employees wanted to form a union. Now, workers can vote in secret. Card-check would be a system of open voting. When a sufficient number of workers signed a form saying they wanted a union, management would have to recognize the union.
This proposal which had appeared to be dead for now looks like it will be slipped into Obama's proposed second stimulus bill, which is being promoted as a "Jobs Bill."
According to a report in the Las Vegas Sun, Bill Samuel, the AFL-CIO’s legislative director, said the union "might consider 'other tactics,' meaning the card-check legislation or key parts of it could be placed into a larger jobs bill this year." (link)
Card-check is abhorrent to the very concept of democracy and rule of law. Card-check will encourage mob rule and violence and intimidation. The secret ballot should be considered sacred. Union thugs will bomb homes and beat up hold outs if they know who the hold-outs are. Also, management opposing unionization will know who has voted for unionization and my be tempted to retaliate against those who have supported it. Workers should not have to be exposed to either management or union intimidation. Card-check must not be allowed to pass. We must be vigilant and not let this get slipped in as part of a jobs bill.
Patricia Rockwell, author of the blog Communication Exchange has bestowing upon be the honor of being the recipient of her Good Communicator Award. Patricia is a recently retired teacher living in Illinois. I am reproducing her award announcement below.
Let me introduce you to Rod Williams A Disgruntled Republican. As you might guess from the title of Rod's blog, he's politically conservative. But you also might guess from his blog's title, he's not always happy with all of the positions taken by the Republican Party. Rod's blog is not your typical political rant blog. Yes, he has strong feelings about politician issues. However, he only advocates to his readers those positions which he has thoroughly researched himself--and, believe me, he is quite a researcher. When he argues an issue, he does so with intelligence and passion. He never stoops to name-calling or nastiness.
One quality I particularly like about Rod--and which I believe makes him unique among political bloggers--is his willingness to admit when he is wrong--or when he has changed his opinion. I've seen this happen several times during the months I've followed his blog. He never changes his mind on a whim--only after careful deliberation. But, unlike many political bloggers who seem wedded to their party positions for eternity--Rod does change his mind--and he lets his readers know why he has done so.
Rod always treats his readers and commenters (and actually, all people) with respect--not just tolerance--respect. This is something that is sorely lacking in politics today, wouldn't you agree? You might think that it's easy for Rod to be so gracious just sitting at home writing his blog, but Rod is also very active in local Nashville politics. He's always organizing or involved in some political event that results in educating or spreading information about political issues to people--just what a good communicator does.
If you haven't ever checked out Rod's blog, I urge you to do so. Whether you agree with his political views or not, I think you'll support my selection of Rod Williams for the Good Communicator Award.
Posts
All Comments
