Archive for Politics - page 3

…about Empiricism.

Francis Bacon (1561 – 1626), sometimes referred to as the Father of Empiricism.

Hat Tip: Tragedy Series

AP:  Marijuana Industry Battling Stoner Stereotypes

Recreational marijuana use having been recently legalized in Colorado, the Marijuana Industry (AP’s language) is looking for ways to increase sales.  I wrote about this in an April 22nd, 2014 post at The Men Out Of Work Blog: Marketing Marijuana In Colorado…

Though the law has changed, the cultural battle lines are the same.  Opponents still argue that marijuana use has risks, especially for youths.  Proponents object to the use of stereotypes in campaigns that warn of potential risks.  And one thing is for certain – the marijuana industry – whatever you want to call it – has the goal of increasing marijuana sales, and to do that it must minimize any stigma associated with it’s use and increase the customer base.  Translation:  get more people to use pot.

I don’t think that is a good thing.

Spare me your slings and arrow for a few minutes while I explain.  The older I get, the more libertarian I get.  Notice the small “l”.  Personally, I think that if you want to smoke pot, you should be free to do so.  But now that it’s legal, it’s turned into a business.  And a business’ first and foremost goal is to grow…and grow…and grow some more.  Keep growing, year after year.  That means either the same people have to use a lot more pot, or – more likely – more people have to start using and keep using it.  And I believe that there is no upside to more people using (or abusing) a mood-altering drug.

Spare me the lecture about alcohol.  Yes, it’s legal and often abused.  That is not an argument for adding one more substance to the pallette of legally abusable substances.  Many people use alcohol responsibly.  But can you argue that there is a benefit to society if more people use alcohol, responsibly or otherwise?  Well, I guess you could argue it, but would you?  I wouldn’t.

I am not a prudish teetotaller.  I use alcohol.  I have used marijuana.  In the past, both to excess.  In hindsight I can truthfully say that I would not have misssed out on anything had I never used marijuana.  Using it had costs to me that were financial, physical and intellectual.  Had I been thinking rationally, I would have opted out.  But I did not…because I was not thinking rationally…because I was young.

The legalization of a substance, advertising it and minimizing the stigmas associated with it’s use will have an impact on the most impressionable in our society – young people.  So let’s be careful.  It’s legal, so go ahead, smoke up.  Advertise responsibly.  But let’s not pretend that there are no risks.

Most of all let’s not hide the risks from young people who are most at risk of making foolish impulsive decisions that may affect them for a lifetime.

…”Six States” initiative fails to qualify for ballot.

Well, it was fun while it lasted, but according to the California Secretary of State, insufficient valid signatures were submitted to qualify the initiative for the 2016 ballot.  The initiative would have carved California up into six separate states.  You can read this for backgound.

I opined early on that this would never come to fruition because it would upset a very large apple cart for the Democratic Party and Public Sector Labor Unions that have a stranglehold on political power in this state.  They found this baby in it’s cradle and pressed the pillow hard.  Long Live the Status Quo!

Approximately 800,000 signatures were required for the initiative to qualify – nearly 1.4 million were submitted, a seemingly sufficent margin for error.  The SOS predicted that only 66 percent of the signatures were valid based on “random sampling”.  So fully 1/3 of the submited signatures were deemed “invalid”.  I’d like to see a little more in depth reporting on this.  The sponsors of the initiative have promised a review of the invalid signatures.

I’m certain that the Secretary of State did a careful and thorough job of verification.  Certain!

Now this:

Two drummers.  Awesome.  And Mike McDonald when he was still “Salt and Pepper Lightning”.

Not content to ban single use plastic shopping bags, the California Legislature has moved to ban free distribution of single use PAPER shopping bags at stores and supermarkets.  Notice I said free distribution.  Per Senate Bill 270, single use carryout bags may still be provided to customers – at a cost of not less than ten cents each.  So apparently all those extra dimes floating around will be the solution to whatever problem was caused by single use plastic or paper carryout shopping bags.  Oh wait.  There never was a problem caused by either of these.  So…problem solved anyway!  And it only costs a dime!  Huzzah!!  Be sure to look for more small change based solutions coming your way from the geniuses in Sacramento.

More: Reason.com – Soon We Will Be Mandated To Haul Our Groceries, Booze and Hamburgers Around In Organic-Certified, Fair-Trade, Shade-Grown Burlap Sacks

Reason.com – California Plastic Bag Ban Survives After All

I hope that not all liberals are fuzzy headed enough to believe that plastic shopping bags are the scourge of our lifetime, but I don’t see any evidence of that.  I reuse virtually all of the plastic shopping bags I get when I shop, so if they are banned I will simply have to buy other plastic bags for those uses.  Amount of plastic “saved”? Zero.  The platic bags are recyclable (as are the paper bags).  Yet they are not listed as acceptable materials to be placed in the County recycle containers where I live (the paper bags can be placed in the recycle bins).  I will not use re-usable bags that are transporters of E. Coli and Salmonlella, which is a far greater real problem than any imagined issue related to plastic bags. There are so many common sense “solutions” to any of the so-called problems created by shopping bags, however, they require a little thought instead of just a knee-jerk reaction.  And as we all know by know, there is no room for thoughtful reflection or logic when it comes to creating the Liberal Utopia of California.

One way to make yourself miserable is to stay angry and agitated all the time.  And one way to do that is to stay focused on politics all the time.  Personally, I think that’s a bad idea and I say that as someone who is very interested in politics.

So, here comes the latest bad idea – Buypartisan.  The app that helps “make every day election day”  through “spending choices”.  It lets you scan a product’s barcode to get information on which political party the company’s CEO, Board of Directors and employees donate to.  Reviews of the app can be found here and here or at many places via google.

So this app should do two things to create more angry people – first there will be more people clogging the aisles at your favorite grocery outlet on their smartphones.  That’s not gonna make anyone happy.  Then, those people using the app will be ticked when they realize the CEO of the company that makes their favorite cornflakes donates money to the “wrong” party.  I predict, chaos, mayhem and mass hysteria.

Politics is not unimportant, but we are all more than simply our political identity.  At some point you have to distance yourself from political considerations and just live your life.  Life is not a zero sum game.  Money flows where money flows.  Sometimes you just have to let it be.

Let the Liberal hand-wringing begin.  Reuters: “California Breakup Plan Would Create Rich and Poor States: Report”.  If there is one thing that cannot be tolerated in California – whether it is one California or Six – it is inequality.

In case you are wondering what I’m talking about, there is an initiative being considered for the California ballot called The Six Sates Initiative which would create six separate states out of California.

According to the Reuters story, the richest state would be Silicone Valley with a per Capita income of $63,288, and the poorest would be Central California with a per capita income of $46,477.  The story also states that the plan has raised “bipartisan hackles”, but quotes no one.  Near as I can tell, everyone outside of “Silicone Valley”, “West California” and “South California” thinks it’s a great idea because those areas are heavily populated and deeply liberal/Democratic while the rest of the state is more sparsely populated and leans Independent/Conservative/Republican and are tired of being force fed a liberal Democrat agenda.  As far as the fiscal disparity, they are sure they can handle their own affairs.

Of course, the stated “inequality” exists even now, regardless of the initiative, but I doubt the concern is great enough for the rich to “redistribute” any of their wealth to their “poorer” bretheren.  All that’s needed is to defeat the initiative, keep those people on the la-la liberal plantation and everything will be fine.

Cross posted at Men Out of Work Blog

I suppose I could make this a “real life irony” post.  When the ACLU requested information from the Justice Department regarding the Government’s monitoring of citizen’s text messages without a warrant, they received in response a document that was completely redacted:

Totally Redacted FOIA response

Related:  The Department of Education employs a FOIA Denial Officer.  Perfect.

Cross posted at Men Out of Work Blog

Here is your feel good story of the day: Entire ISIS Bomb Making Class Blown up by Instructor’s Mistake.  Apparently the Bomb-Teacher had a class of 21 students who suddenly found themselves burning in hell when their instruction took a wrong turn.

Instructor: “So you see our bomb is complete.  To detonate simply turn this swi…BOOM!

Students: “……..”

That’s some Instant Karma right there.

Hat Tip: Ace of Spades HQ

Cross Posted at Men Out of Work Blog

We used to have a saying when we were kids and someone was getting mad over a small thing.  We would say sarcastically “Don’t make  a federal case out of it!”  Now it’s popular to do just the opposite.  Let’s make a federal case out of everything!  The one important difference?  It’s the adults talking now.

Case In Point: what kids eat in school.  For approximately as long as kids and schools have existed, the only issues with what kids ate at school were the speculative origins of the various mystery entrees in school lunches.  Now, since “The Children”® are either morbidly obese or malnourished depending on which particular do-gooder is speaking we now must have the Federal Nose stuck into everyone’s business.  And idiocy ensues.

Courtesy of Business Insider, we learn that the Federal Initiative called “Let’s Move” is unpopular with the kids it was designed to “help”.  Part of the “Let’s Move” initiative was a revamping of the school meal standards in the National School Lunch Program.  Yes, you heard me – the National School Lunch Program.  Of course these revisions were undertaken with the best of intentions.  And when you’re do-goodin’, intentions are all that matter.  The reason it is unpopular?  Because the “right portions” and “healthier food options” required by the initiative are apparently very small and/or inedible and the kids are left hungry after lunch.  Kids being kids, they have taken to social media, namely Twitter and are tweeting pictures of their lunches along with sarcastic remarks – follow this link to see some of their tweets:  Business Insider – Students Are Tweeting Photos of Awful School Lunches….

Now everyone knows that other than school cafeteria lunches, the only other time food and school intersect is at Bake Sale Time.  Bake Sales have long been a way for school groups to raise money for any number of causes, and it’s a treat for the kids, too.  And they still will be – albeit with appropriate supervision.  Because starting this fall, we’ve made a Federal Case out of it.  There is literally a Federal Law governing the fare offered at school bake sales:  The 2010 Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act, one of the stated goals of which is to fight childhood obesity…apparently by by making kids hunger-free.  And the best way to make them hunger free is to only offer them foods they won’t eat.  Makes perfect sense *eyeroll*.  Read the details in this article at the Wall Street Journal: “Put Down The Cupcake:  New Ban Hits School Bake Sales”

Remember that the people making these rules are only doing it for your own good.  You need their help because you aren’t smart enough to make good decisions.  And they care more than you.  And they think they are better than you.

And when you finaly figure out there’s a boot on your throat, remember: it’s for your own good.