I wanted to read what Plan he had for Women, so I went to page 35.
BHO says:
"We also need to change a system that is stacked against women. Forty percent of working women do not have a single paid sick day. More and more women are denied jobs or promotions because they’ve got kids at home. As the son of a single mother, that is not the America that I believe in. I’ll be a president who stands up for working parents. We’ll require employers to provide seven paid sick days each year. We’ll enforce laws that prohibit caregiver discrimination. And we’ll encourage flexible work schedules to better balance work and parenting for mothers and fathers. That’s the change that working families need."
--BarackObama, Speech in Bettendorf, Iowa, November 7, 2007
My response is, firstly, some of these claims are patently ridiculous.
"More and more women are denied jobs or promotions because they’ve got kids at home"
--I know of no case of this type of discrimination. I know of no employer, that when he finds out a female applicant has kids at home, denies them employment. The federal Equal Pay Act has been in effect since 1963, and is a criminal statute. Additionally, all states have tort law where employers can be sued for just the inference of discrimination and the burden of proof is on the employer to assert his innocence.
--In 2003 BHO voted for the Illinois version of the Equal Pay Act, which expanded the federal law in 2 ways:
First, the Illinois Act covers all employers with at least four employees. Thus, the Illinois Equal Pay Act covers Illinois employees that do not meet the statutory requirements of the federal Equal Pay Act (either because they do not meet the individual test, or do not conduct business of at least $500,000 per year).
[Secondly,] the Illinois Equal Pay Act, on the other hand, is not limited to employees within the same establishment but rather to employees within the same county. Specifically, the Illinois Equal Pay Act states that it is not to be interpreted to require employers to pay an employee in one county the same as an employee in another county
-- Therefore a person believed to suffer discrimination has federal, state and tort law avenues for redress. One problem with this however, is that the government has preeminence in such cases, which means that, if found guilty, the employer is fined, or goes to jail, or the business goes bankrupt [with say 5 employees] BEFORE the tort law case gives one dime in compensation or restitution to the victim. Additionally, the federal EEOC has its own jurisdiction on these types of cases that overlaps with the other violations of law.
[As an aside ---Please note that these federal and state laws apply equally to illegal aliens; yet Mr O claims he will stop "raids" on businesses that hire illegals because he believes it immoral to take jobs away from poor people [this is a different topic, but related to this enforcement proposition]
Thusly, in his Plan for America, Mr. O proposes to increase enforcement in this Equal Pay area. My question is "How?" More police? More funding of federal prosecutors with specific instructions to place a priority on these types of cases?
I am going to go out on a limb and suggest that Mr. O believes that there is more discrimination going on than is filed or reported, thus he believes in more enforcement.
But at what cost? According to the EEOC--
"enforcement of the Equal Pay Act in 1979 through the end of May 2003, the Commission has filed approximately 364 lawsuits"
What is the cost to maintain a bureaucracy like the EEOC, an agency which has broad, sweeping powers [which I personally believe are Constitutionally questionable]?-- When there are ALREADY federal and state CRIMINAL statutes on the books?
Do we really need more enforcement? Do you want your business inspected by an overstaffed prosecutorial agency that has the power to come into your place of business to interview your employees to ensure that they are not being discriminated against?
I also note that there is nothing here about Men and Their Families, which clearly discriminates against men. What about the need for Paid Leave for Men, or Violence against Men, or Men's Health? These topics are ignored; because there is a cultural bias that insists on "equality" for one group, and not another.
Need I go on?
How about this, from the same Plan section:
"Paid Sick Days -- Obama will require that employers provide seven paid sick days per year to their employees."
How will this impact your business, in addition to other days you are required to provide?
Or this from his Plan:
"Expand Flexible Work Arrangements Obama will create a program to inform businesses about the benefits of flexible work schedules; help businesses create flexible work opportunities; and increase federal incentives for telecommuting. Obama will also make the federal government a model employer in terms of adopting flexible work schedules."
Will a federal worker come to your business to inform you about the benefits of flexible work schedules?
"Ending Violence Against Women Obama will appoint a special advisor who will report to him regularly on issues related to violence against women. Obama will also pass legislation that provides job security to victims of domestic violence and sexual assault."
Let’s say you are an employer and you hire a woman with a past history of being a victim of violence. You can't ask about that on her application, because that is discrimination. But with the new job protection program in place, you can't fire her, since she now has federal protection and job security due to her domestic-violence experiences.
Clearly, these are far-reaching and insane policies. And this is just the first part of the Obama Plan for America that I have examined
Slavery and the 1st Amendment
Tuesday, 05 August 2008 00:00 | Author: William M Lolli |
Tuesday, August 05, 2008
Illegal immigration continues to be front and center in my quest for the preservation of freedom in our country.
I have previously argued regarding the immorality and exploitation of the slaves among us in Sanctuary Cities, the abuse of Illegal Alien Children, and the government sanctioning of the agro-business cartels for cheap labor.
Wednesday, 14 July 2004 17:35 | Author: William M Lolli |
This is my response to the New York Times’ Nicolas D. Kristof July 17, 2004 editorial entitled Jesus and Jihad. To do so will require a bit of parsing of the column.
I don't agree with Mr. Kristof. His perspectives and conclusions are based upon incomplete information, which lead him to prejudicial conclusions.
Mr. Kristof sites his concerns about the popularity of the Christian fictional book series Left Behind. I say that it is Mr. Kristof’s abilities to accurately research and factually connect the dots that got left behind.
Reagan’s Last Gift to America: No Oxygen for Clinton
Sunday, 06 June 2004 17:39 | Author: William M Lolli |
The 40th President of the Untied States, Ronald Wilson Reagan died yesterday at his home at the age of 93.
Today in Europe president George W. Bush commemorates both the passing of the 2nd greatest president of the 20th century as well as the 60th anniversary of D-Day Europe on the beaches of Normandy.
This coming week as the nation mourns the loss of President Reagan, the cameras and the press will be focused on the grandeur, pomp, and circumstance of a Presidential Funeral Procession.
Reagan’s body lies in state now in California, but within two days, he will be flown to Washington D.C. to lie in state at the Capitol Rotunda. By Friday, June 10, 2004, he will undergo great media coverage and fanfare before returning to his home in California; there to be permanently interned beside a slab of the Berlin Wall that he so bravely fought to bring down.
The eyes of the world will watch as we eulogize this great man, and refresh our hearts and memories of his great courage and beliefs.
We will remember all those in Eastern Europeans who he set free from Soviet tyranny.
All this week, June 5 through June 11, 2004, and even beyond, our flags will fly at half-staff, honoring the man who had a vision of America as a shining beacon of freedom to an enslaved world and who believed that governments existed as a convenience to the people and not the other way around.
So much for President Clinton’s book tour!
In Chicago on June 4, Bill Clinton was attending BookExpo America’s annual national convention to announce the June 22 release of his new book “My Life”.
Yes, Bill Clinton. “My Lie Ffff”. The big, block-busting book seller of the summer, tactically designed to be released to suck the oxygen away from John Kerry, promote Hillary into a position to become the Vice Presidential candidate-nominee, and also renew and revise the sagging and fading Clinton Legacy.
Yes, Bill Clinton. The man who never did wrong. The man who always had an excuse on why it was never his fault. The man who could not tell a lie, because he never did. The man who saw in childhood black churches burn, though they never existed.
Yes, Bill Clinton. The darling of the Left. The man who was given a $50 million advance on a book that would “tell all”. A book that was to take the NYTimes Best Seller List by storm and stay there for weeks.
Yes, Bill Clinton. The man who labeled Ronald Reagan’s American renewal as The Decade of Greed.
Yes, Bill Clinton.
He is now gasping for air, as the harbinger of the launch of his biggest deal ever has now been over shadowed by the death of a man whose philosophy Clinton despised.
Clinton planned to use the Chicago BookExpo speech as the springboard by which he would launch his city-to-city book tour.
His plan:
Stage 1: Plan and book interview after interview with reporters. Get as much “face time” as the networks and cable channels would allow. Every reporter would be dying to get a chance to ask him this or that about the “intimate details” of his memoirs. That’s millions in free advertising.
Oohhh. Can’t you feel the shivers of excitement running down Katie Curic’s back?
Stage 2: Hit the Book Trail. Do what Hannity did with the Hannitize America Tour! Only this time it will be the Clintonize America Tour!
Stage 3: Talk about himself! His favorite thing! And millions will listen with awe as he revises history before our very eyes.
It was a great plan. But that was then, and this is now.
The oxygen has just left the room. The air time is all but gone for at least another week. And in that week the Evil Right Wing Conspiracy will remind Americans about the greatness of America, the vision of freedom that she brings to the world, and how we need to unite against the War on Terrorism and Islamo-Fascism; just as Reagan united us against the Soviet threat.
Damn that old man! How will Bill get his message out now?
Thank you, Lord God, for giving us Ronald Reagan. Thank you Lord for using his life as a beacon for us all. Thank you for taking him Home to be with You.
And most of all, thank you for using the greatness of his life and the commemoration of his death as an instrument to defeat the Liberal Cacophony which he leaves behind.
Amen.
Why the ACLU is Wrong about the Second Amendment
Friday, 12 January 2001 00:00 | Author: William M Lolli |
Recently, a friend introduced me to the American Civil Liberties Union web page for the southern region of California, at http://www.aclu-sc.org. My friend who is ambivalent towards guns and gun ownership sited all of the logic presented by the web site in the Bill of Rights section. He particularly pointed out the ACLU's stand on the 2nd Amendment and how it was "clearly" not an individual right.
I read through the 2nd Amendment section of the page and was struck by the liberal sophistry of the ACLU's stand regarding the right to bear arms. "Clearly" the ACLU's distortions of history and the 2nd Amendment were obvious to me. I began to point out the flaws to my friend:
On an introductory note, I found it most interesting that the ACLU, in it's web page, warns the reader to not parse an Amendment when reading it to derive legal and philosophical meaning. This is a valid warning, since the interpretation of any writing naturally begins with a contextual understanding originating from the intent of the author(s).
Contributor Commentaries
Contributor's Commentaries