DOGGONE EVERYTHING (In Search of Something)

Wednesday, November 08, 2006

Post-election-Minimum Wage/Anti-Smoking-part 2

DOGGONE EVERYTHING: Post-election-Minimum Wage

A comment from
Cinci Enquirer Blog says it all:
Anonymous said... "It's such a shame that all people saw was an increase in the minimum wage and didn't bother to take the time to see all the other ramifications of passing this issue.Luckily for the consumers, since they also passed Issue 5, no one will be going to these restaurants anyway."

Anonymous said...
"Maybe, just maybe this will entice a few smokers to actually stop this disgusting habit, if not, enjoy the great outdoors, I'll be inside breathing fresh clean air!"

I guess the smokers do win then. They'll be outside getting exercise while you're sitting in your smoke-free restaurant eating your supersized high-calorie food. Pretty soon we'll have to vote for an amendment to the constitution outlawing extra value meals because the non-smokers are now all fatties.Irony is wicked, don't you think?
1:06 PM, November 08, 2006

Labels: ,

Post-election-Minimum Wage

Well, people (teens?) have to pay for their digital TV and cell phones and BMW's these days. I probably made less than a dollar per hour (and got to keep my tips) when I waitressed. I drove a 2nd hand car that I did not own, didn't have a computer etc. etc. I made good money. What's different with the picture today?

From Cinci Enquirer Blog.
"Restaurant guests 'will have to pay'
Cliff Peale reporting:It won't be long before visitors to Ohio restaurants see higher prices after voters approved Tuesday a constitutional amendment to increase the state’s minimum wage, one restaurant owner said today.Starting next year, the minimum wage for servers, who rely on tips for most of their pay, will increase to $3.43 per hour from $2.13 per hour. Craig Maier, president and chief executive officer of Frisch's Restaurants Inc., said the measure would cost his company about $3 million a year and will mean increased prices early in 2007."The guest will have to pay it," Maier said.Frisch's operates about 100 restaurants in Ohio, and servers can be about 30 percent of the total staff. Smaller restaurants will see a bigger impact, Maier predicted.But he said the most onerous impact for business will be the privacy and record-keeping provisions. Under the amendment, employers must maintain complete pay records for all employees for at least three years after they leave the job, and provide free copies of those records to people acting on their behalf.The amendment garnered about 56 percent of the vote Tuesday."

Labels: ,

Friday, November 03, 2006

Ted Haggard-AOL Blog

Conservative Minister Resigns in Yet Another Scandal
Posted Nov 3rd 2006 9:04AM by Phil Bailey
"...The latest in the line is Ted Haggard, the leader of the National Evangelical Association. This is a guy who gets to talk with President Bush every Monday morning no less. Now he's resigned because it turns out he's been paying for drugs and sex with a guy for three years. It's surreal."
Comments from Readers:
2.Leslie at 10:20AM on Nov 3rd 2006. " I'd jump on the bandwagon and agree 100% that the guy is slime, except for the timing. If this wasn't politically motivated, this wouldn't be front page news a few days before the polls open. Given that this guy is leading the charge against gay marriage over there, dealing with such a 'relevant' scandal in the final days before voting will definitely divert his attention elsewhere... I am definitely sick of the tabloid crap that has morphed into headline news these days. Scandal is becoming so old hat (and so overreported) that it is losing its shock value. It has deteriorated to the point IMO that as soon as a scandal is revealed somewhere, I just wait for the affected side to reveal an equally damning scandal against the other side. It is ridiculous, but some people thrive on this stuff (and it actually sways their VOTE). God help us all..."
7.Milton Delgado-Veteran/Latino/Christian/Gay at 10:37AM on Nov 3rd 2006. "Too many times religion is used to promote hate and even crimes. This form of hypocrisy is sad; it disparages both the church and the LGBT community. Regardless of what you think about either community, neither should be generalized as drug-taking, sex crazed, liars. There are great Christians and YES, gay people in this world, and believe it or not there are some great people that are members of both communities. Rev. Haggard is just not one of them!"
8. Nadia at
10:42AM on Nov 3rd 2006. "The Ted Haggard, James Dobson, Pat Robertson, Jack Hayford, (etc.) types make me nervous. They feed on power and control of the masses using the guise of religious zealotry to do so. Mixing politics and faith is extremely dangerous, as the Crusades, the Inquisition, and modern Terrorism have proved. Scandals such as the Haggard one are simply a glimpse of what truly goes on behind the scenes of many so-called ministries. Wake up, people!"

Labels: ,

Thursday, November 02, 2006

KERRY's BLUNDER (sort of)

So, once again, the media has something to talk about ad nauseam.And that's what it was last night - from CNN to FOX--I don't know how anyone can watch all day/evening the talking heads go over and over and over Kerry's statements and analyze the same videos over and over and over. My opinion? He didn't mean to say what he did (if you look at his original speech), but he said it. I do have to agree with Newt who was on Fox last night that there does appear to be a camp of 'America loathers' in the Dem. party.
The Democrats (including Hillary) are upset because Kerry is drawing negative attention when they are trying to sweep the White House. The Republicans just want to show how unpatriotic he is. So, again, political posturing on all sides.
The worst diatribe (for Kerry/against Bush) I saw last night was on MSNBC Countdown with Keith Olbermann. (He makes O'Reilly look like the soft-spoken Clint Eastwood.) His shouting and vitriolic language was too much. I had to change the channel. Didn't anyone teach him that when you start ranting and calling people names (The President, for Pete's sake!) that you lose your audience? Some of his comments were not even accurate. His nastiness overcame his message - which was?

Labels: ,