Category Archives: morality

Another Counterproductive Union

Posted on by
Reply

This one is ad hoc, but it’s no less destructive of consumer well-being. That’s especially ironic here, given who this group is: a collection of pharmacy employees at chains like CVS and Walgreens, and soon-to-be-defunct for a variety of other reasons, Rite Aid.

From Monday through Wednesday workers at Walgreens, CVS, and Rite Aid have pledged to call in sick[.]

A fake-sick move that they’re calling, in their manufactured angst, “pharmageddon.” Never mind that the employees’ lying about the reason for their absence should itself be a firing offense.

One pharmacist, who organized a prior, smaller walkout, and who now is cowering behind anonymity, exposed the cynicism of the current move:

Our stores are still thousands of prescriptions behind. Our patients are still going days, weeks, or even months without their needed medicine. And they’re pretending that there’s not a problem. Until they acknowledge that there’s an actual problem and work to address the actual problem…we have to keep pushing.

So: the way to solve the problem of patients going with their meds for extended periods of time—a supply chain problem as much as anything—is to deliberately deny patients access to their meds for extended periods of time by simply not showing up for work. And absenting themselves with their own false claims.

Intrinsically Inferior

Posted on by
Reply

The Oregon State Board of Education has waived, essentially, all high school graduation requirements—demonstrated competency in reading, writing or math—and is allowing anyone and everyone who had the initiative simply to enroll in a high school to graduate with a high school diploma.

Board members said the standards…harmed marginalized students since higher rates of students of color, students with disabilities, and students learning English as a second language ended up having to take the extra step to prove they deserved a diploma, The Oregonian reported.

The OSBE and the Progressive-Democratic Party-run Oregon State legislature and governor can’t be bothered to do the work of taking their own steps to fill those gaps and eliminate the need for the students’ “extra steps.” No, these…persons…have completely written off the minority students, along with those with disabilities and those taking (or not?) ESOL, and have simply eliminated all learning requirements.

Because, apparently those students are intrinsically inferior and unable to learn the material.

This is yet another example of the despicable bigotry of the Progressive-Democratic Party.

Canceling Halloween in the Name of “Inclusion”

Posted on by
Reply

Dr. Ronald G. Taylor, South Orange & Maplewood School District (New Jersey) Superintendent, has canceled Halloween celebrations and costumery in his schools, all in the name of inclusion and diversity.

On the district’s website, a[] release stated principals were surveyed on whether school-sponsored Halloween celebrations should continue or be replaced with a festival that is focused on autumn. They state the principals’ “overwhelming” response favored in canceling Halloween celebrations in school.

Notice that Taylor didn’t survey the parents or the students. Of course, he didn’t: the kids belong to the district; uppity parents have nothing to say, and the students…well, they’re just kids. Taylor:

Ultimately, it was determined that I know this may make some uncomfortable….

But the discomfort of some doesn’t matter when it’s the discomfort of those who might disagree.

Inclusion. Diversity. Don’t like the nature of Halloween? Don’t participate; no one is making anyone do so.

Yes, that’s the point. Forcing “inclusion” is exclusionary. Forcing “diversity” is exclusionary. Each ignores the views, even the preferences, of those disfavored by the forcers and locks those disfavored ones out of the programs instead of inclusively letting folks decide for themselves whether to participate. And those varying opinions and decisions regarding participation are the essence of diversity.

“What New Catastrophe?”

Posted on by
Reply

The Wall Street Journal‘s editors wrote about the lack of Iran sanction enforcement, with particular regard to Iran’s ballistic missile development program. The editors wrote of a number of failures to enforce despite Iran’s repeated violations.

They closed their editorial with this question:

What new catastrophe would cause President Biden to rethink his Iran policy?

Here is what that catastrophe will look like, but Biden’s “rethinking” will be too late.

If one day, he [Rafsanjani] said, the world of Islam comes to possess the weapons currently in Israel’s possession [meaning nuclear weapons]—on that day this method of global arrogance would come to a dead end. This, he said, is because the use of a nuclear bomb in Israel will leave nothing on the ground, whereas it will only damage the world of Islam.

Biden’s current “thinking” has him desperate to reenter the agreement with Iran whereby Iran is allowed (even were it to honor such an agreement) to finish its nuclear weapons development after some small period of time.

Ready to Get Involved?

Posted on by
Reply

That’s the claim of Secretary of State Antony Blinken regarding the current Hamas assault on Israel and Hezbollah’s and the latter’s parent, Iran’s, threats to attack Israel should Israel press its response to Hamas’ barbarism, Hamas’ rape and butchery of Israeli women, Hamas’ butchery and beheading of Israeli babies.

This is not what we want, not what we’re looking for. We don’t want escalation. We don’t want to see our forces or our personnel come under fire. But if that happens, we’re ready for it.

And do what, exactly, with this “readiness?”

SecDef Lloyd Austin was a bit more loquacious, if no more specific.

What we’re seeing is a prospect of a significant escalation of attacks on our troops and our people throughout the region. We’re going to do what’s necessary to make sure that our troops are in that position and they were protected and that we have the ability to respond. We won’t hesitate to take the appropriate action.

What is that appropriate action, exactly? Regardless, what Blinken and Austin might do in the way of acting on their claimed readiness is governed by Progressive-Democrat President Joe Biden. Actually, we know what Blinken would do regarding acting, were he left to his own devices. This is what he said on X in the immediate aftermath of Hamas’ 7 October butchery inside Israel:

Turkish Foreign Minister @HakanFidan and I spoke further on Hamas’ terrorist attacks on Israel. I encouraged Türkiye’s advocacy for a cease-fire and the release of all hostages held by Hamas immediately[.]

Immediate cease-fire. Hesitate. Don’t respond. True enough, Blinken deleted that post quickly, but only under the pressure of the opprobrium he was getting from…mainstream America. And the deletion itself is a demonstration of Blinken’s level of integrity, as by his deletion, he rewrote that history and is trying to pretend it never happened.

However, trumping Blinken and Austin, the Hesitator-in-Chief, Joe Biden himself, has long demonstrated what he’ll “do” in these sorts of situations. Just a few years ago, the then-Vice Hesitator to an only slightly less timid President advised that President not to go after bin Laden when we had that terrorist in our sights in Pakistan. Then, as Hesitator-in-Chief, he cut and run from Afghanistan, abandoning Americans and American allies to the Taliban terrorists, along with tens of billions of dollars worth of modern weapons—many of which, oddly enough, are finding themselves in the hands of Hamas terrorists and Russian barbarians.

And just a few days ago, our forces or our personnel [have] come under fire. We’ve had a significant escalation of attacks on our troops and our people. And our Hesitator-in-Chief not only has hesitate[d] to take the appropriate action, he’s carefully decided to do nothing at all.

Biden’s empty chit-chat, whether directly from him or through his Secretaries, is the antithesis of deterrence.