Mid-Week Post

The bookmark of the work-week...


Oh, it's probably because of that stupid joke you made:

The NDP and Liberals say they asked to be part of the government's Ukraine delegation, but were refused. 

This is why Liberal voters must be challenged. One can see from the many instances Trudeau has opened his fool mouth that he is unfit to lead Canada. That someone would actually consider voting for him even at this stage just boggles the mind.


I'm sure this is merely a coincidence:

Russia ordered 150,000 troops to test their combat readiness Wednesday in a show of force that prompted a blunt warning from the United States that any military intervention in Ukraine would be a "grave mistake."

Vladimir Putin's announcement of huge new war games came as Ukraine's protest leaders named a millionaire former banker to head a new government after the pro-Russian president went into hiding.

The new government, which is expected to be formally approved by parliament Thursday, will face the hugely complicated task of restoring stability in a country that is not only deeply divided politically but on the verge of financial collapse. Its fugitive president, Viktor Yanukovych, fled the capital last week.

Arizona governor vetoed a bill that would have allowed businesses to refuse homosexual patrons:

Arizona's governor vetoed a bill that would have protected people who asset their religious belief in refusing service to gays, ending a proposal that put America's deep polarization over gay rights on stark display.

What the proposed law actually said:

Here are six important points to understand about the just-passed bill:

1.  If Gov. Jan Brewer (R) signs it, the bill, S.B. 1062, would make some modifications to a 1999 Arizona law called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). 

2.  Under current Arizona law, if a business wanted to discriminate against gays, they would not need this bill to be passed to do so. It is not currently illegal for a business to deny service to someone because they are gay. Some cities in Arizona have ordinances against it but there is no state law against it. If business owners in Arizona wanted to deny service to gays, they could do so in most of the state under current law.

3. Even though business owners across most of Arizona (and much of the United States) have the right to deny service to gays, they are not doing so. Opponents of the bill claim it would usher in an era of "Jim Crow for gays," in which gays would be denied service at businesses across the state. If business owners really wanted to do this, though, they could already be doing it. The bill does not make that more or less likely. Business owners do not want to deny service to gays. This is not because they fear government sanction. Rather, it is because: 1) Their religious, ethical or moral beliefs tell them it is wrong to deny service; and/or, 2) the profit motive - turning away customers is no way to run a business.

4. A RFRA law, either state or federal, does not give anyone the license to do anything they want based upon their religious beliefs. Rather, it says what needs to happen for the government to take away someone's religious freedom. RFRA provides citizens with religious freedom protections, but that does not mean that everyone who claims their religious freedom is violated will win a court case using RFRA as their defense.

5. No business has ever successfully used RFRA, either a state RFRA or the federal RFRA, to defend their right to not serve gays. In fact, no business has even been before a court claiming to have that right.

6. Even if a business wanted to claim the right to not serve gays under RFRA, their claim would be even harder to defend under S.B. 1062. So, anyone who is concerned that someone may one day try to use RFRA to discriminate against gays should prefer the bill that was just passed over current law.

One might not want to shine a spotlight on kids who are already targets of some very ignorant @$$holes:

When Kim Kelley-Wagner adopted two little girls from China, now ages 13 and 7, she never imagined that her family would attract much attention. So the barrage of rude and ignorant comments she's received on a daily basis over the years has shocked her. But instead of dismissing her critics, Kelley-Wagner has created a controversial photo series starring her daughters, hoping to show others how words can hurt.

Do the pink t-shirts read: "I can hurricane-kick until bully ribs break"?:

Seven years ago two teenage boys from Nova Scotia wore pink to school to support a younger student who was bullied solely because he wore pink on his first day of school.

The touching act of solidarity eventually spurred a movement across North America and lead to the development of Pink Shirt Day -- a day to wear pink and take a stand against bullying.

Useless gestures, waste of time.


And now, George Washington and his bar tab:

Indeed, we still have available the bar tab from a 1787 farewell party in Philadelphia for George Washington just days before the framers signed off on the Constitution. According to the bill preserved from the evening, the 55 attendees drank 54 bottles of Madeira, 60 bottles of claret, eight of whiskey, 22 of porter, eight of hard cider, 12 of beer, and seven bowls of alcoholic punch.