Thoughts and Prayers: The Religion Thread

Ah yes ... the "truth above all else" guy weighs in with the conclusion that hurtful lying is ... no big deal.

 

Lying about people you disagree with seems to be both bipartisan and ecumenical. That said, while my perception may be colored by my personal beliefs, the Republican party and it's adherents seem to do so from the top down on a more regular basis.

 

True. Posting fake and vicious reviews re: someone's livelihood -- an auto mechanic, for heaven's sake! -- is a bit more than simply "lying about people you disagree with." And this is true whether "the other guys do it!" or not.

 

True enough. It has also become a simple fact of social media and the 24 hour news cycle. It really does not seem to matter what the source of the disagreement is - politics, religion, race, LGBTQ, guns, immigration, whatever. Such attacks have become common, if not normal, in this society. I really don't think that it's possible to blame any particular group for it at this point.

I suppose that I could make a case that when the President leads it by example and brings much of his party along that he bears significant responsibility, but it's become very widespread across our nation.

 

Oh, I'm not exactly "blaming" any group. But I'm not much for the "we're more righteous than they are!" caterwauling, either.

 

Are we positing that a Yelp-bombing campaign and a Moms For Liberty chapter have an equal likelihood of being hatched or incubated in a church fellowship hall?

 

No. But we are (well, I am) positing that wherever such campaigns are hatched, the hatchers are equally certain of their righteousness.

 

That I will buy.

 

You know who needed quick cash?

Judas.

Jesus forgives him. History does not.

The agreement in any union is just that: union. That you consider the collective first. Even if it means individual hardship for the term of the strike in exchange for the general improvement of every member.

One of the reasons unions stockpile strike funds and resources for members is to keep members and their families from desperation - at least for the length of time it takes to win the concessions they seek. Doesn't always work.

But I'm not sure Drew Barrymore or Bill Maher qualify for a desperation exemption in any case. They could certainly seek a WGA waiver to go back into production if they want to keep their other employees whole. As far as I know they have not done so.

A further complication of which is this: I believe Barrymore and Maher are both listed on their programs as Executive Producers.

So they are "negotiating" against themselves.

I can of course forgive them as a personal matter.

As a union man, I struggle to weigh their selfishness or ignorance against the good of the unions to which they (willingly) belong.

 

Did he have a structured settlement?

 

He wanted a lump sum rather than an annuity, because he couldn't get a reverse mortgage.

 

A personal aside ... back before I began my ascent into the ivory tower, when I was still a tool-and-die maker but had just completed my MBA, I took some of the initial steps toward becoming a Chartered Financial Analyst (it's mostly a 3-exam series ... the last one apparently is one booger of a test). One Sunday afternoon an in-law with more credentials than situational awareness excitedly told me all about this new thing he'd discovered: You could take some windfall and, oh my God, convert it into a stream of cash inflows! It was all I could do to not make merry of his lighting a candle in my darkness.

We now return to the bazillionth verse of "Our Pols Are Holier Than Their Pols."