Day: January 28, 2015

Rauner’s right to work plans are not appreciated by some

​Big Labor objects to Rauner’s worker-empowerment zones:​ (http://insurancenewsnet.com/oarticle/2015/01/28/rauner-blasts-labor-unions-for-states-woes-a-588002.html#.VMmY7CwfrIU)

​“The Bruce Rauner that managed to mask his true feelings about working families for most of last year showed his true agenda today. Much like his past proposal to cut the minimum wage, he is now going after workers on all fronts by supporting Right To Work, attacking Unemployment Insurance and Workers Compensation, as well as prevailing wage and Project Labor Agreements that benefit both workers and the taxpayers.​

​Which working families is he talking about? The privileged ones whose union contracts insure them lots of money by way of wages etc. which are not and never will be available to the hoi polloi. Tsk, tsk.

Being a pacifist about drugs

​Gummint wars on drugs as its duty to protect citizens from a social evil, George Mason University’s Don Boudreaux argues; but it has become "addicted to intruding in this and many other noxious ways into people’s lives to win this war.

But:

​Even if, contrary to fact, the government could succeed at ‘winning’ the ‘war on drugs’ – and even if you believe that government has a moral duty to protect people from themselves if doing so is worth the price by some reckoning – is the actual price paid today to fight this ‘war’ really sufficiently low to justify the alleged gains?​

​Think about it.

On anti-feast of Saint Thomas Aquinas, Priest and Doctor of the Church

​Once a saint with a feast day, now nothing but a stinking “memorial.” Thus have decreed the liturgical technicians, who wrap pliant bishops around their little fingers.

It’s a “pastoral” loss, because Aquinas was a real, graspable human being who was like us in every respect but oh so different. Vive la difference, my friends, the kind that gives samples of living life in the real. But not making the muster for lit-techs who have their PLANS, do they not​?

For getting things neat and orderly and making it pretty damn hard for the daily homilist who might just otherwise have a bit of advice or two, in Thomas’ case for scholars and students.

Homilist can talk about Thomas if he wishes, yes, but he’d have to decide to go against the grain in an age of relative indifference to saints. The techies have spoken, the matter est fini.