One question that no one is asking: why does Hamas launch rockets into Israel when it knows the rockets won’t make it past Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system? Might as well fire them west into the Mediterranean.
While I wish the Supreme Court had ruled the other way in the Hobby Lobby case, the optimist in me (a small one to be sure) feels that all the recent talk of descending down a slippery slope where corporations will refuse to pay for health insurance policies that cover drugs and procedures that they find objectionable on religious grounds is entirely overblown. First of all, slippery slopes are rare if not nonexistent in US politics, law, culture, and business. Second, the Supreme Court merely settled one case in a narrowly defined (i.e. applicable only to the named parties in the suit), it did not change any laws or declare any laws unconstitutional, nor did it strike down the ACA birth control requirement. Third, while it set a precedent that future litigants can cite in future suits, I do not think many companies will be willing to take the time, effort, risk, legal liability, and especially the cost of denying employees drugs and medical procedures when litigation is almost sure to follow.
Most companies, I optimistically feel, will not choose to go down this road as it is hard enough to remain profitable as a company and all companies seek as few legal headaches as possible. Plus, no company will want the bad PR and its possible effect on the bottom line. The idea that a company will decide to not pay for or allow its health insurance provider to cover blood transfusions, as some are suggesting will happen, seems ludicrous. I don’t think any company will be willing to open itself up to that legal liability, nor do I think any insurance company will do so either. Really, I don’t think a health insurance company would ever consider creating a health plan that doesn’t cover blood transfusions, which are usually essential and life-saving, due to the legal liability and bad PR it would pose. I bet (and hope) that if asked to do so by a company, the health insurance company would refuse.
While the Supreme Court made a bad call, it seems unlikely it will bring on the extreme situations some are predicting. And even if a handful of companies decide to try their luck in court, that will hardly be a slippery slope and they outcome of such cases would be nowhere near assured.
About a year ago John Boehner was bitching that Barack Obama was leading from behind or not leading at all. Now that Obama is leading Boehner has decided to sue him for it.
Dear John McCain: nobody won shit in Iraq, there is no victory to preserve.
Iraq was headed to break into three parts pre-surge, then the surge stabilized Iraq as one, now that we left it’s headed back to three parts. Let it be.
Are the people that feel that Sgt. Bergdahl should be tried and convicted of desertion really suggesting that after he spent five years as a POW in a Taliban prison (more like a steel box than any concept of a modern prison that you and I might conceive) he should then be thrown into a US military prison? Try & convict for desertion if you must, then sentence him to “time served”. Please remember he is still a US citizen and a human being, not a political football or a piece of trash.
Also: if he did go AWOL, remember he was 23 at the time. He made a bad decision then, he’s neither the first nor the last 23 year old to do so. These days we feel the human brain isn’t fully mature until age 25, with the part involved in decision making being the last to develop.
It’s going to take a lot of money to get the money out of politics.
In a game of Billionaire vs. Billionaire, you and I are either collateral damage or completely ignored. #GetMoneyOut
I’m rethinking my views on requiring voters to have a driver’s license as ID to vote. Not only do I now feel it should be required, but I feel only those with a motorcycle endorsement should be allowed to vote.
And I just heard that in Mississippi there’s a bill pending requiring voters to not only have a driver’s license, but that the license must be a CDL Class A “Big Rig” license. Well played MS!
Only letting bikers and truckers vote will get the money out of politics. And potholes will be a thing of the past.
Win-win, done & done.
If someone told you 2+2=22 you’d tell them they were wrong wouldn’t you?
Even if they sincerely and passionately believed it, you’d still tell them it was wrong, no? If they explained their thinking on how combining a 2 with another 2 gives them 22 and that it makes perfect sense to them, you’d give them a short lesson on how addition works, how a 2 is a symbol, that it’s representational of a numerical value and has meaning beyond the mere character as written. You’d explain to this person how 2+2=4. You’d try to get them to see the science, the logic of it, of how their definition of 2, their assumption of 2, was wrong.
Now if this person, after listening to the explanation of how 2+2=4, continued to say they believed 2+2=22, and then went on to say that you were in fact wrong, and not them, because when you add “what” and “ever” you get “whatever” so thus 2+2=22 what would you do next? You might tell them that they didn’t understand the basic concepts of math, and that they were using a technique of language within the realm of math, and that by believing 2+2=22 they were not qualified to hold an intelligent discussion about math or to teach math to others, no?
Yet those who say equally ridiculous things like 2+2=22 in other realms like economics, life science, climate science and sociology, their voices are getting louder and louder.