The REAL War on Christmas

So there is a lot of fuss over the past month about the “War on Christmas” being waged by Secular forces, most notably Atheists. The uproars range from the White House calling the yearly dead tree with lights a “Holiday Tree” to Atheists buying up display areas so that Mary, Joseph and Baby Jesus have no room at the inn. We hear news report after news report (Usually I'd mention Fox News, but really I've seen them all over the channels) about how every effort is being made to stamp out the day where a baby was born in a stables. It may come as a surprise to all of you, but I completely agree with this fear. There is indeed a WAR being waged against everything that Christmas is supposed to stand for.

How can I say this, you ask? (You did ask, I heard you! Yeah you over there in the corner with the Cheesy Burrito from Taco Bell. Did you bring enough for everyone?) How can I possibly believe all of the dozens of talking heads? Do I really think that the EAAC forces (Evil Atheists Against Christmas) are trying to destroy all that is sacred and holy (holly?) about this event that sent three old men wandering in the desert following a shiny light? Well, not exactly.

There is a way being waged against Christmas. It has billions of dollars in backing and is being pushed by some of the most powerful businesses in America (Nay, the World! Yes I said Nay ,get over it.) Despite what so many people seem to believe, this War isn't even remotely a new action. It has been going on for decades. What is this war you ask? (No not the Burrito Guy, the girl in the third row texting her friend about shoes.) Consumerism.

That's right, Consumerism! Companies like Wal-Mart, Target, Sears and so many more are waging a war on Christmas. Every year their salvos get stronger and faster as evidenced by the fact that Black Friday this year turned into Black (and Blue) Thursday. The massive consumer glut that occurs in the weeks before Christmas and what Christmas traditionally stands for. Just in case you need a reminder here is a link.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKk9rv2hUfA

Click it and watch, I'll wait.

Back? Okay let's keep going.

Notice, not a single word about 40% off at Wally World or the best price on Gizmotrons at SuperBuy. Traditional Christmas has nothing to do with busting your credit cards to show off. Traditional Christmas has nothing to do with making sure your kid has the latest Y-Crate Game System. Hell, really it doesn't even have anything to do with decorating dead trees and putting up sparkly lights. The Consumeristas want us to forget that. They want us to think that the only way to show love for yourself and others is to spend yourself into poverty. So every year, they wage a war to separate us from our money and make us think that it is all in the name of Christmas.

Atheists aren't waging a war against the spirit of Christmas. Muslims aren't waging a war against our “most hallowed beliefs.” Big business is and we just sit buy and let them year after year without a single objection. Maybe this year, we call all just sit back and think about exactly why we celebrate Christmas. Can we at least make a little effort to make it Christmas again and not Cashmas?

End of Rant

Iraq/WMDs part II?

http://news.yahoo.com/us-weighing-military-options-syria-uses-wmd-223957678.html

I first read about the rumors of Syria using WMDs on its rebels a couple of day ago and much like many of the commentators after the piece above, I did indeed suffer flashbacks to Iraq's “Massing of WMDs” debacle not that long ago. Still my main focus wasn't really on the article but more on the comments left afterward. People weighed in both for and against (Mostly against) any attempts by the US to step in to stop the use of WMDs against Syria's rebel forces. The comments really got me pondering all the sides and this is what I have come up with.

The argument basically boils down to “Should the US get involved with yet another foreign conflict even as we wind down from the last two” and it is a very good question. As a nation, we are massively in debt and our troops are so very tired. Why should we risk any more of our sons and daughters lives in a war that isn't even our fight?

Those against (which I am technically one of) argue that this simply isn't our fight. They call out that it is not America's job to be the policemen of the world. (Although I would technically point out that this nation has basically made it our job by insisting under pretty much every national/military accord signed by the nations of the world since around WWII be dominated by US forces. This includes UN Security Forces BTW.) They argue that we didn't get involved when Syrians were killing Syrians with more conventional weapons so why get involved now. They point out that a sizable chunk of our debt (Around 5 Billion Dollars currently) is because we have been fighting two very long wars by borrowing money. Basically we shouldn't get involved because this isn't our fight and we can't afford it. I agree on purely monetary reasons, not moral ones.

Those for argue that it is the moral responsibility of everyone to help those who need help. They argue that if positions were reversed, we would want people to help us. Somehow they feel that the threat of using weapons that could literally kill 1000s of people pushes us to a higher moral imperative than the fact that Syria's leaders have been achieving pretty much the same thing with standard bombs and bullets. If we didn't have a moral obligation a year ago, then we don't have one now.

The sad part is, I doubt this sudden push by the US and other nations to stop Syria is based off any altruistic feelings on our part. Notice that no real efforts were done to help as long as the threat was contained within Syria's borders. But now that Syria MIGHT be planning on using WMDs, governments such as Israel and Turkey are suddenly recalling that Syria has missiles capable of carrying said WMDs into neighboring nations.

So will we once again be forced into a war in a country where neither side really likes us and neither side would really want us there? Will more of our brave armed forces be forced to sacrifice their lives? Will the machine of war grind on for another 10 years making billions for the Arms Manufacturers, but costing us so much more? The next few weeks will tell.

Customer Disservice for the loss!

My readers have heard me gripe many times in the past about how the concept of customer service and customer appreciation. It is one of the sorest points of my general Ass-ish nature. Especially in large chain stores, it seems like the attitude is “We don't need to be nice to you, just go spend your money and leave us alone.” Today did nothing to dissuade me of this feeling.

So my wife got up early this morning so she could go to the major store that she calls “The Den of Inequity” in the vain hope she could find the items that she had been looking for all week. She managed to find three items that she thought would do, picked up a small container of yogurt for her snack and two other items. Keep in mind that all six items were very small and could fit in one bag. So the clerk rings up her items, hands her ONE bag and Paula leaves for work. When she gets to work, she finds that the bag only contains some of the purchased items and none of them are her snack. Apparently the cashier felt the need to split the six small items into two bags and neglected to hand her the other bag.

Now believe it or not, this is not the cause of my current rant. After all accidents happen. Maybe the cashier had just gotten to work or maybe (Since the Den is open 24 hours) were just minutes away from going home. No, my rant comes from what happens next.

We drove back out to the DOI to return the items that she had purchased that morning and complain that the cashier had shorted her the other items. When I tell the kid behind the Customer Service desk that a cashier had accidentally shorted my wife that morning, he gets all defensive and VERY confrontational. He asks, “Are you sure you wife didn't get the items? Are you certain that she just didn't notice them? Maybe she got the items and lost them.” I politely informed him that my wife didn't lose the items and then not so politely asked the punk to give me the danged refund.

Now folks keep in mind that the grand total of my wife's purchases from that morning was $11.96. Also keep in mind that the items this kid was basically accusing my wife of stealing were worth $3.00 of the sad $11.96. I had the receipt and the three items that weren't left behind. I was simply asking for a refund, not all the money in the safe. So why in hell did it take 20 minutes of arguing with this kid to get my money back?

So, finally the kid refunds my money. Already in a grumpy mood, I find my wife and we pick up some items (Since we are there) and go to check out. That is where I see essentially why my wife lost her midday snack and shows the general level of competence in the DOI. The lady rings up our purchases and as she does, she places the items in bags then rotates the little turntable to a new bag. She finished ringing up almost everything, but misses three items hiding behind the cat litter boxes.

She has already rotated the full bags around and left several empty slots on the turntable. After I point the items out to her, she rings them up and places them in an empty bag. She charges my wife's card hands her the receipt and starts checking out the next customer. She starts placing his items in the same bag as ours before I can stop her. When I point this out to her, she gives me a “looks could kill” glance, swings the turntable around and then goes back to checking out the next customer.

Now not only would we have been short some very important items (Hey premium mixed nuts are important!) if I hadn't noticed, the person behind us would have gotten OUR stuff without having to pay for it. Still the thing that honked me off was that look. She made the mistake, but she was angry with us for catching it.

Now folks, having worked those jobs I know that they are thankless jobs with crappy pay. I understand that your feet hurt, your eyes hurt and your back hurts. Mistakes happen, that is a fact of life and I am okay with that. What I am not okay is the bad attitude that so many people have. Customers pay your bills. Customers feed your families! Unless you live in a tiny town with only one store (I have BTW LOL), there are other places the customers can go. Suck it up, grin and bear it and remember that a little friendly customer service can make everything go smoother.

END OF RANT

If at first you don't Secede, try try again

Okay so I was listening to the radio on the Interwebz last night while working on my latest literary masterpiece, The False Fang Detective Agency. Some Anderson Cooper wanna be was holding discourse on the subject of Secession. His opinion was that Secession is legal and that the people who have petitioned the US Government for permission to Secede from the Union were the highest form of Patriots. His guest disagreed very loudly, stating that everyone who signed the various petitions were the lowest form of traitors. She implied that the petitioners should be taken from their homes and shot at dawn.

Now, folks I personally feel that most of the people who signed those petitions are doing so out of a severe case of sour grapes. Sorry, I just do. If you feel otherwise, that is your right, but most of this uproar (In my not so humble opinion) is because Romney lost and Obama won. We saw similar disgruntledness during the whole Al Gore/Chad incident. (Though I can't remember off the top of my head if we have a secessionist movement going on then too.) So people are pissed and not afraid to show it.

With that kind of lengthy aside...well aside, let me say that I am firmly in favor of any group (Gaggle, Herd?) who is so pissed off at the government that they feel the need to secede. Hell, it is how this country got started. A bunch of grumpy white men decided that fat King George was being mean to them so we got together and kicked him out of our sandbox. Happened again about a century later when a bunch of states felt that the Union wasn't playing fair and filed for divorce. Of course, that one didn't work out so good for the Secessionists, but they did let their disgruntled feelings known. So if you and yours are pissed off at the government and want to pull up stakes, that's cool. More power to you!

So “What's you're problem with Secessionists, Macleod?” You might ask. (Well I hope you ght might ask it or else this blog would be kind of pointless) Simple! Despite the wonderful part of the Declaration Of Independence (And sorry to those who think otherwise, it is not part of the Constitution) where it talks about “When in the course of human events...” Secession is still considered an act of treason. The Supreme Court even upheld this belief with the Texas VS White ruling of 1869. Basically, from a purely legal standpoint, The US is an indestructible entity and any attempts to dissolve it are illegal.

Thus said, let me reiterate that I have no problem with any group of individuals who get so honked off with the government that they feel their only recourse is to secede from the Union and go their own way. Yup, go for it. Bon voyage, tata, bye bye and even aloha. Stage your revolution! Fight the oppressors! Down with the establishment! Power to the people! (Man I wonder how many old slogans I could come up with?)

But here is a teensy bit of advice for all you potential revolutionaries out there. IF you are contemplating a revolt against the US government, it would be prudent NOT to sign a petition with your full name and address. It would be even more prudent NOT to send said signed petition to the Official Web Site of the White House. Since there is no way in Hades that the US will ever grant a Peaceful Secession from the Union, you guys are only giving the enforcement type people a handy list of names to check off if things ever get busy.

Revolution in all of its myriad forms is the very birthright of the United States of America. Our country was forged in blood and tempered in battle time and time again. At a little over two centuries old, we are an infant when it comes to nations. I have little doubt that times will come in the future where we will disagree to the point of blows. Every man and woman has the right...Hell the obligation to resist oppression in all of its shapes and forms. I just pray that when those times come, we exercise some form of wisdom and intelligence in picking sides and battles. I, for one, will not begin my battles by declaring my intents directly to the people I will be resisting.

End of rant

Our government needs an enema!

(Title used with all due respect to Jack's Joker)

We have severe blockage!  Prepare the dynamite!

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRLDbwQ4cDTTVix2a1zZhl35zrtnC2eoFQkyJa74MMQzLk2MRU0

     This article highlights exactly what is wrong with our government.  With massive tax increases a mere month away that everyone agrees will most certainly send the country spiraling back into another, what are the so called leaders on either side doing?  Are they desperately working together to stave off this disaster before everyone suffers?  Are they even making any real effort to move forward towards some sort of solution?  Are they even sharing a Double Mocha Frappachino in some attempt at getting along?  NOPE!

Keep in mind, folks that its all about posture!

          Both sides are posturing and preening seeking some sort of angle that will allow them to "win" the upcoming argument.  Never mind that the answers are known to pretty much everyone who  has more than three brain cells to rub together.  We need to increase Revenue, decrease Spending and balance the damned budget.  That's it.  That is what needs to be done.  Everything else is in the details.

      Now of course as the old saying goes, the Devil is in the details.  How do we increase Revenue?  Tax increases, tax law overhauls, hiring alchemists to turn lead into pudding?  Where do we decrease spending?  Cut funding for popular public programs, Increase the eligibility age for SS/Medicare etc or put every politician on minimum wage?  These are all viable questions and should be considered.  I personally feel that we shouldn't allow any tax increases until the government proves it can be trusted with the money.  (Which ideally will put off any tax increases for the foreseeable future.)  I feel that popular programs need severe overhauls and better oversight which would allow us to cut some of the funding to them and STILL keep them viable.  However, both the Damnocrats and ReBoobicans are showing absolutely no drive to even confront these issues let alone actually work together to fix them. 

Well it is more like a tragedy but hey...

 

      Right after the election, both sides did these marvelous little dances that gave the impression that they had seen the error of their ways and would be willing to work together.  They preached that we would not have a repeat of the last fiscal emergency where impasse on both sides drove us to the point of disaster.  And like so many false prophets (Profits?), their sermons have turned out to be false.  The Damnocrats claim a mandate from the peeple even though they only won slightly more than half the popular vote.  (BTW does anyone else find it funny that Romney's final total on Popular Vote was 47%.)  The ReBoobicans are back to their "No new taxes no matter what!" speeches and both sides as a whole are refusing to give.

Why can't we all just get along?

     Let me slap a little definition out there for you.Webster's defines Compromise as: settlement of differences by arbitration or by consent reached by mutual concession.  In short it means that both sides in an argument give in a little.  It doesn't mean "Hey I am not going to give in, but you have to make concessions!"  By the very nature of the beast, making a compromise means that both sides lose.  Our Political Parties hate that.  "Their side" has to lose and "Our side" has to win.  And when neither side agrees to compromise, then the other side is guilty of blocking any chance at progress.
     The sad part is, even though I knew better, I actually briefly believed that maybe, just maybe our Pollytickans had learned something and would actually make some effort to work together without weeks of posturing.  And in all fairness, some on either side of the carpet are actually showing signs of doing so.   Reboobicans are making noises about agreeing to revenue increases and Damnocrats are showing some signs of being willing to put Reforms on the table.  Unfortunately, none of these guys are the head honchos.  I just hope that both Obama and Boehner can do the same.  The Fiscal Cliff is looming and I have a thing about heights.

and here is a picture of a cute bunny for absolutely no reason.

 

Ooookay someone explain this one to me?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2240787/Ronald-Post-Obese-death-row-inmate-claims-hes-innocent-bid-delay-execution-400lb-weight-cause-severe-pain-rejected.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

     Now, this rant isn't about whether or not this guy is guilty or innocent or even whether he deserves to die.  The courts will decide if he warrants a retrial or not.  (course in my humble opinion, if you plead no contest to being involved in a murder you are prolly guilty)  No my question is a move the gentleman made to have his execution delayed because his obesity would cause him extreme pain during the process.

     Hokay, so he shouldn't executed because he might suffer some discomfort while they are KILLING him?  "Sorry you can't execute me today because I might be uncomfortable while you are doing it" seems a little silly.  I don't see any reason why our legal system should be any sort of obligation for making death sentence inmates all comfy cozy while they pump them full of a deadly cocktail of drugs.

     Lethal Injection is supposed to be the kinder, gentler way of executing criminals  (It ain't, btw.  Experts say that the process is very painful though not as painful as previous methods.)  Pre-Lethal Injection, let's look at the various methods used to execute felons.  Beheading...Yup painful.  Crucifixion...oh yeah really painful.   Hangings...moderate to extended painful.  Firing Squad...Oh yeah!  Painful!  Electrocution...yep you guessed it REALLY PAINFUL.

     But wait, you cry!  What about cruel and unusual punishment, you ask?  (Well its either you guys or the voices in my head again.)  To you (Or the little blue gnomes in my head) I reply  "You're executing the guy!  Taking his life!  Shuffling off his mortal coil!  Kicking his bucket!  It don't get much more cruel than that!"

      If someone is accused of a heinous crime, they deserve fair and honest legal defense.  They deserve every chance they can get to get  fair and impartial hearing to prove their innocence.  However, arguments like Mr. Post makes are ridiculous.  When someone kills someone else in a violent crime, I doubt that most of them had any concern about whether or not the bullets fired caused the victim "severe pain" so why should we have any sort of consideration for the one firing the gun?

END OF RANt

Who determines fair?

Oh look he's pointing at something!

      So okay, here is the FB post that kind of started this whole train of thought.  It is a quote by the famous/infamous Paul Krugman about business/labor practices.  Now normally, I don't particularly like this man or his reasonings, but when taken in a general sense this quote is fairly accurate.  Of course, like most general ideas the actual truth is far more complicated, but I liked the general notion so I reposted it on FB.

http://porkbrainsandmilkgravy.blogspot.com/2012/11/well-its-bit-more-complicated-than-that.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+PorkBrainsWithMilkGravy+%28Pork+Brains+with+Milk+Gravy%29

     Now my brother Benjamin Baker saw my post and wrote a most excellent counter point blog that very effectively dealt with some of the deeper questions behind this issue.  (If you aren't following his blogs yet, you are missing out on some amazing Shift)  His musings got me thinking yet again and I took finger to keyboard before my headparts exploded from the confuzzlement.

     Who or what determines what it means to pay a "fair wage?"  Who says, "Okay, you are doing X job for Y hours so it is fair of me to pay you Z wages?  The person who is paying the wages will feel that it is his right to pay the lowest salary possible to better improve his profits.  The worker will always feel that it is his right to earn as much money as he can for the labor he produces.  Never will you find the two ideas comfortably meeting.  Employer will always want to pay less and the employee will always want to make more.  

     The US Government as well as many other countries has an established Minimum Wage that is paid (At least in theory) to every person working in the country.  People with skills and training (Experience) can make significantly more than that in their chosen fields.  The disconnect, at least to me, is when people who haven't taken the time, effort and money needed to gain said skills and training expect to be paid as much.  I have read many "opinion pieces" that state the minimum wage should be $15.00-$20.00 so that people can earn a "decent living."

       Does anyone else grasp the absolute ludicrousness of that idea?  The idea that Joe with a high school diploma flipping burgers at Jolly Burgers should earn as much as Sally at ACME Mechanical Sharks Ink who went to school and got a degree in Mechanical Sharks?  Sally spent four years of her life and thousands of dollars to get her training.  Joe walked in to Jolly Burger and said, "Hey kin I flip burgers?" 

     Fair pay does not mean that every single person makes similar wages.  It means that people with the same skills/training/education or any combination of those makes similar wages no matter their race, creed, religion or planet of origin.  Companies aren't required by either law or morality to pay a worker "enough money to live off of."  They should only be required to pay the worker a salary appropriate to their skill level.  If your skill level is Minimum Wage level, then that is what you should be paid.  If that amount isn't enough for you to live comfortably off of then get another job.  Heck get two they might be small.

     People get annoyed when I bring up my father and how he worked 10-12 hours a day his entire life with the County Road Crew AND cut dozens of yards a week to earn enough money to feed his family and keep a roof over our heads.  They scream that times are different now and that people shouldn't have to do that.  Well, I scream back that times are no different now than they were 20 years ago.  We the people do not owe anyone else a living.  We aren't responsible for you earning a better wage.  

     If the job you hold doesn't pay your bills, get a better one.  If you can't get a better one because you lack skills/education, get the skills you need.  If you can't do that, get two jobs.  We as a Nation aren't required to make sure you have everything you need.  That responsibility is completely on your shoulders.

End of Rant