JUST SOME STUFF

Yesterday we had what the media called a “fast food worker’s strike” in many larger cities across the country.
            If you want my expanded thoughts on the idea of these people demanding that their employers pay them more than they are worth in the marketplace, you can read a column I wrote in July.  Here’s the link.
            For the Reader’s Digest version, just keep reading.
            I am sick to damn death of people with limited or next-to-no actual job skills demanding that they receive a wage that would allow them to raise their families … which in most cases means one, two or three more illegitimate kids.  Here we have people who, for the most part, paid little or no attention to their education.  Maybe they were too busy smoothing out the Bondo on their Camaros, dedicating themselves to their eventual NFL or NBA career, or living in fear of someone telling them they were “acting white” if they were caught paying attention in class.  Whatever the reason --- here they are as adults in America and they aren’t worth more than $7.40 an hour to an employer.  An actual human being born with all of the advantages of being an American, and they reach adulthood unable to produce more than 12 1/3 cents per minute in value to their employer.  If you’re more than six months out of high school and this is the best you can do you can go ahead and chalk up the first 18 years of your life as pretty much a waste.
            Now what’s this crap about not being able to raise a family on minimum wage?  You’re NOT SUPPOSED to be able to raise a family on minimum wage.  This is something you will not hear 0bama myrmidons or leftist sycophants acknowledge.  Apparently these women – and three-fourths of these minimum wage fast food workers are women – must be given a free pass on their irresponsible behavior.  The basic expectation of society should be that you will not procreate (have babies, for those of you in government schools) until you can afford what you begat.  One of the greatest of social wrongs in this country is to have a baby that you cannot afford to raise.   What kind of a useless and pathetic human being do you have to be to say:
 “Hey y’all!  Lookie here!  I have a baby!  I don’t have a husband … I don’t have an education … I don’t have any marketable job skills … I don’t have any future … but I do have working ovaries … and I have this baby!  And now y’all need to give me some money and fooooooo stamps so I can feed this baby!  You hear?”
            And now these people are going on strike to tell us that they deserve $15.00 an hour?
            I’ll tell you what they deserve.  They deserve to have their little bundles of joy classified as “endangered” by local authorities and taken away.  These children will have a much better chance if they are raised by an adoptive or foster family, or even in an orphanage where there would be some structure to their lives, than they would being raised by some life support system for a womb with no other skills than getting knocked up and then demanding money from the rest of us.
            These idiots don’t seem to understand that even if the government did interfere in the marketplace to require that they be paid – in reality – about four times what they’re worth per hour, they would still be unable to afford the precious fast foods that they incessantly cram down the gullets of their ever-expanding children.
            Now let me tell you one more thing about these “strikes” for a $15.00 minimum wage.  This will explain why union leaders are so involved in this fast food worker unrest.  Many union contracts, you see, are indexed to the minimum wage.  Some of these contracts have clauses that set the minimum union wage as a factor of the current minimum wage.  If that index was, for instance, 2.5, then an increase in the minimum wage to $15.00 per hour would raise the minimum union wage in this instance to $37.50 per hour.  Funny, isn’t it, how the media never seems to explain this to you?

BRITAIN TO 0BAMA … POUND DESERT SAND
            Oh, this is rich.  Days after taking office 0bama made it clear to Great Britain that he didn’t particularly hold them in high regard.  0bama had learned from his Marxist father that England was bad .. a very bad colonial power that brought pain and suffering to Africa.  Obama carried that disdain of the UK right into the White House.  Remember the bit about the Winston Churchill bust?  So now … perhaps … a little payback?
            But now … about Syria.  Many have asked me on Twitter what I think about military action there.  Not much, really, but there’s a lot to consider.
            First --- nobody is going to claim that 0bama even approaches a low-level of competence in his foreign affairs.  This whole “red line” idea of his was complete nonsense.  First .. the world knows that 0bama is weak.  They know when he bloviates about a “red line” he will not have the courage to follow up.  So when Assad uses chemical or biological weapons against his own people, he did so with the assumption that 0bama was full of hot air.  If 0bama now does NOT put some oomph behind his “red line” statement not only Assad, but the Mad Mullahs of Iran, Russia’s Putin and the rest of the world’s bad guys will know that 0bama is pretty much all bluster.
            Then there’s Iran.  Consider that 0bama has used pretty much the same language in addressing Iran’s quest for nuclear arms as he used on Assad.  He told Iran that he would not permit them to develop nuclear arms.  That’s his red line for Iran.  Now Iran suspects, as they should, that 0bama doesn’t have the courage to back up his “will not permit” line.  If 0bama fails to enforce his Syrian red line, why would anyone expect him to enforce his prohibition on nuclear arms for Iran?
            Now there are a lot of my Libertarian friends out there who absolutely feel that in no way, shape or form should the United States become militarily involved in Syria.  I can understand that point of view.  I would suggest, though, that when a fire is raging through your closely-packed neighborhood, it might be best to begin fighting that fire while it is still on the next block, rather than wait until the flames are licking at your walls.
            There’s a famous quote from Winston Churchill that somewhat fits the moment.  Here ‘tis:

"If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a small chance of survival. There may even be a worse case: you may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves."

            It would be nice if we could get the technology from that “Under the Dome” show on TV, and drop one of those domes over the entire Middle East.  That’s not going to happen though, so at some point we’re going to have to clean that mess out before they destroy us.