Ian Underwood Every time I hear about a state (most recently Massachusetts) or city (most recently Seattle) raising the minimum wage to some unsustainable level, it makes me wonder what I would do if I ran a business in one of those jurisdictions.
The obvious responses would be to (1) move to a new jurisdiction, (2) hire fewer employees, (3) raise my prices, or some combination of those three. But there’s a less obvious response that I think I would try first.
Recently, Skip started a post with this charming thought: ‘The job of a journalist is to report facts, add context where necessary, and leave it to the consumer to decide what he thinks.’
I would have agreed with that before I read Neil Postman’s excellent book How to Watch TV News. But Postman helped me understand that it’s a fairy tale version of the actual job.
The job of a journalist — what journalists are hired to do — is to get people’s eyeballs pointed in a particular direction (or their ears tuned in to a particular source of sound), so that advertisers can try to sell them things. Once you understand that, a lot of otherwise incomprehensible things about journalism start to make sense.
We seem to take it for granted that, when it’s time to pick a new judge for an appellate court, we should look at people who are already serving as judges on lower courts. And when we’re filling vacancies on those lower courts, it seems natural that we should look at lawyers who have been successful, whether in private practice or public positions.
So the whole judicial branch ends up being staffed by former lawyers.
And that is a huge problem. Because being a lawyer is the worst possible training for being a judge.
I keep hearing that Brett Kavanaugh is a committed textualist, a clear thinker, someone who reveres the written Constitution, and so on. I have to say, I’m not seeing it in his opinions.
To take just one of many examples that people are discussing, let’s look at his dissent in the second Heller case, which Fox News holds up as an example of the kind of ‘clear and succinct reasoning’ that we can expect from Kavanaugh if he’s confirmed. This is essentially his closing argument:
It never ceases to amaze me how many people find it reasonable to think that we need to go to court to get an answer to a question like: Can a state enact a law banning the ownership of semi-automatic rifles?
Textualism says that when applying a statute or constitutional provision, we should look only at the text — the words that it contains — setting aside considerations about tradition, history, legislative intent, and a lot of other things that we can’t really describe with accuracy or certainty or consensus.
In Robert Heinlein’s story ‘Friday’, the California Confederacy, noting that Californians with college degrees earn more than those with high school diplomas alone, enacts a law granting all citizens a bachelor’s degree upon graduation from high school.
By Rep. Dave Testerman
In New Hampshire, most public school funding originates in the pocketbook of local taxpayers and most of us hope we elect a local school board that watches out not only for the students but also the taxpayer. It doesn’t always work out, but we have had some very good board members in Franklin.
A much larger problem has occurred at the State Board of Education level. Unfortunately, our state has appointed State School Board members for 18 of the last 20 years that loved regulations and micromanaging our public schools.
With backing by the NH School Boards Association and the School Administrators Association, the pressure on local schools and Superintendents has been to simply comply with whatever the DoE and the State Board said…or else. Frankly, it hasn’t been working. So what has been the effect on school funding?
We’ve been having a debate at GraniteGrok about which of us supports a filibuster on the threatened new Senate “gun control” bill, and who thinks we should let’er rip…i.e. “Let’s have a public debate in Congress. Let’s see a vote! Let’s see who wants to impose de facto national gun registration.“ Count me among…
So, I’m reading the comments on a FoxNews story that reports how Paul Ryan is preparing for his upcoming debate with “Doofus” Joe Biden (don’t ask me how I got to this point). Anyhow, the silver lining of this Sunday-night distraction was stumbling upon a comment posted by a user named “I AM ALWAYS RIGHT you donkey“. It was entertaining (and appropriately sarcastic) enough to share…enjoy.
Oh, and if you are an offended Liberal who feels compelled to comment on this guy’s historical accuracy, save your breath because it doesn’t matter – HE’S MAKING FUN OF YOU!!
Here is a condensed version of history:
This from the New Hampshire Newt Gingrich campaign website, "NewtHampshire!"
"ANSWERING THE ATTACKS: Setting the Record Straight on Newt’s Positions on the Issues and His Record"
"Now that our campaign to rebuild the America we love is gaining momentum, those who want to see us fail are on the attack, digging through Newt’s past to try and stop us. Newt, Callista and our campaign welcome the opportunity to tell the truth about Newt and set the record straight about Newt’s positions on the issues as well as his record in public life and as a private citizen.
We’ve set up this page to arm you with answers to the attacks. See an attack that is not answered? Let us know. This page will grow as we receive more feedback to help you answer the attacks.
Catholic? Pro choice? Guess what? You can’t be both…
This Youtube video is based on the "Voters Guide for Serious Catholics." I have seen this in print in several places, including newspapers like USA Today. I wonder how many of my fellow "Catholics" will choose to somehow forget the list of "non-negotiables" and instead go straight for other "human rights" issues as some sort of trade off.
From the Guide:
On most issues that come before voters or legislators, the task is selecting the most effective strategy among several morally good options. A Catholic can take one side or the other and not act contrary to the faith. Most matters do not have a "Catholic position."
But some issues concern "non-negotiable" moral principles that do not admit of exception or compromise. One’s position either accords with those principles or does not. No one endorsing the wrong side of these issues can be said to act in accord with the Church’s moral norms.
This voter’s guide identifies five issues involving "non-negotiable" moral values in current politics and helps you narrow down the list of acceptable candidates, whether they are running for national, state, or local offices.
You should avoid to the greatest extent possible voting for candidates who endorse or promote intrinsically evil policies. As far as possible, you should vote for those who promote policies in line with the moral law.
Here are the 5 NON-NEGOTIABLE issues:
This speech given by Archbishop Charles Chaput Friday evening at a dinner sponsored by ENDOW (Educating on the Nature and Dignity of Women) contains some of the best words I’ve heard uttered by an American Catholic leader in a long time. It’s fitting it makes the news cycle rounds today, as I walked out of my Church during the homily this morning after being lectured by a very misguided Pastor about voting for candidates that promote "peace" instead of war and torture. This came on top of his euphemistic admonishment to "respect life at all stages" (yes- Father can’t often bring himself to speak the "A" word, as he fears offending the liberal portion of his dwindling flock). I forwarded the Archbishop’s words to him, as he really needs to read them and LEARN them. It’s a long read, but well worth it. The most Reverend Chaput reminds us that as Catholics and Christians, we are NOT obligated to refrain from speaking and acting our beliefs in the political world, nor should we tone down in order to not offend (my Pastor’s problem) which is the point of his new book, "Render Unto Caesar"…
I want to do three things with my time tonight. First, Terry asked me to talk a bit about my book, "Render Unto Caesar," and I’m happy to do that. Second, I want to talk about some of the lessons we can already draw from this year’s election. And third, I want to talk about the mission of ENDOW.
Before I do any of that though, I need to say what a friend of mine calls my “Litany to the IRS.” Here it is. I’m not here tonight to tell you how to vote. I don’t want to do that, I won’t do that, and I don’t use code language — so you don’t need to spend any time looking for secret political endorsements.
I plan to speak candidly, but I can only do that if you remember that I’m here as an author and private citizen. I’m not speaking for the Holy See, or the American bishops, or any other bishop, or even officially for the Archdiocese of Denver. So the things I say tonight are my personal views, nothing more. I think they’re pretty solidly grounded in Catholic teaching and the heart of the Church, but it’s your task as Catholics and citizens to listen, evaluate and then act as you judge best.
As adults, each of us needs to form a strong Catholic conscience. Then we need to follow that conscience when we vote. And then we need to take responsibility for the consequences of the vote we cast. Nobody can do that for us. That’s why really knowing and living our Catholic faith is so important. It’s the only reliable guide we have for acting in the public square as disciples of Jesus Christ.
So let’s talk for a few minutes about "Render Unto Caesar." When people ask me about the book, the questions usually fall into three categories. Why did I write it? What does the book say? And what does the book mean for each of us as individual Catholics? This last question will be a good doorway into talking about the 2008 election, but let’s start at the beginning first. Why did I write this book, now?
Democrat illegal immigration plan in MA . Did you happen to catch this piece of news about our liberal neighboring state to the south ("Oh Doug, like NH ISN’T liberal these days?") regarding a change of policy for its state police? Saturday’s Boston Globe has the skinny: A new Massachusetts policy makes it clear that State Troopers … Read more
. After many years of watching the Sunday morning talking heads shows, this weekend, I’ll be staring back FROM the set. Arnie Arnesen, former Democratic gubernatorial candidate and long-time liberal NH political pundit hosts a program about NH politics called "Political Chowder." I was invited to be a member of the panel discussion … Read more
This is rather interesting: DALLAS, Nov. 15 /U.S. Newswire/ — A United States citizen who now lives in Great Britain has joined with the country’s leading gun owner rights organization in a federal lawsuit that says nonresident citizens are unfairly being targeted by existing laws that restrict gun ownership to those who live in the … Read more