A Room With A Liberal View

 Lots of people wondering how "The View" has been on the air for 30 years.  Basically a bunch of liberal chicks sitting around a table with one token conservative.   Sometimes they start yelling.  I thought "The View" was supposed to be a light and frothy show.  Instead you get Whoopi Goldberg's anti-Trump meltdowns.  The other one Sunny Hostin who I never heard of before says uneducated women voted for Trump meaning they never went to college.  So wait a minute your WHOLE education up to but not including college doesn't count?  Then she says racism and misogyny also were big factors that got Trump in.  The price of pet food had nothing to do with it?

Word on the street is "The View" might be on the chopping block along with Morning Joe.  Elon Musk might buy everything that's not nailed down.  Maybe buy Yonkers who knows?

The existential meltdown continues

 I have actually read in some online forums about people who have broken down emotionally and mentally over the Trump victory and have to be counseled.  I kid you not.  Now let's remember Trump also won the popular vote and his victory was big enough you could call it a mandate.  The legacy media is pretty much dead at this point as they're not as influential as they thought they'd be.  People are gravitating more towards alternative independent media like Joe Rogan and not even giving a passing thought to what the New York Times has to say these days.  Ole Gray Lady hubris.

Whither this blog?  Start any post even mildly favorable to Trump and there's threadshitting.   I don't plan on this place becoming a dumping ground or landfill for Trump hatred over the next four years.  Criticism yes but there's a fine line between that and unhinged, valid takes and deranged rhetoric.  I'm also seeing a lack of critical thinking skills like Trump wants every Latino person who voted for him to leave the country.  That's just low-effort shitposting.  Another one people who haven't gone to college don't know how to vote that's just plain intellectual snobbery.  You know some calculus and some Nietzsche that makes you special?  Saw a bumper sticker once that said "Without Truckers America Stops."

Word of advice to the Democrats:  Next time leave Taylor Swift out of it.

Does your vet need to know Shakespeare?

 Does your gastroenterologist need to know calculus?  How many existentialists does it take to change a light bulb?  You do not need to be a well-rounded individual unless you're Chris Christie.  Many conservatives like Charlie Kirk are now making the case that you do not need a liberal arts college education to get ahead in life.  Worked under a young and talented chef back in the day.  He had a little higher education under his belt but he preferred to dive into the labor market at an early age.  You learn by doing.  Teach kids how to make money.  I vastly recommend trade schools over college unless college is your thing.  I'll never forget the tour our chef friend took us on at the famed Culinary Institute of America in Hyde Park New York.  Young people zeroing in on their passion that's what it's all about.  In France our chef friend said chefs are practically revered.  He also said if you're a chef you'll never be out of a job.  College graduates on the other hand often have trouble landing their dream job right away.  Paying back student loans another current issue although the CIA costs a pretty penny too.

College.  What a racket.

What a fracking interview

 The CNN Interview of Kamala Harris/ Tim Walz with Dana Bash asking the questions:

Walz reminded me of a contestant on Jeopardy who just stands there and hardly rings the buzzer.  Moral support for Harris clearly although he did dodge the question about his military service and said something about his wife correcting his grammar and he was proud to be a public school teacher.  Harris basically answered Bash's questions vaguely but got poetic towards the end when she said the true strength of a leader is lifting people up.  We'll just leave everything else for the chat.  I do try to be fair here at Stranded but imo it was a weak interview, inadvertently funny in spots and probably says to most thinking people anyway she shouldn't be the leader of the free world.

What. The. Actual. Frack.

Cheech & Chong MD

As you know NY is only the latest state in the union that wants to jump on the medical pot bandwagon. Well actually it's Gov. Andrew Cuomo who wants to by reactivating some kind of dormant pro-medpot law that's been on the NY books for some time now so it's more of a fiat thing but there's something unintentionally funny about a bunch of 60-70 year-old patients on the cancer ward toking together in the midafternoon in the sunroom overlooking the river. It is in my view a very paradoxical and contradictory public health message to be drumming into our skulls on practically a daily basis the unmitigated evils of tobacco use and yet somehow pot under certain circumstances may even benefit you healthwise. Even if it does help some folks manage certain types of chronic pain better risk/benefits ratios should be better explained by the health establishment which they don't seem to be doing imo e.g. maybe you'll live with your glaucoma better but you might do some damage to your brain. Over on the free speech front I was reading over on Drudge today how Fox News' Megyn Kelly got in some hot water for saying Santa was white. I'm always of the view that you should be able to say what you wanna say and anyway since we wanna do the right thing we can make Ole St. Nick black if you want, have him divorce Mrs. Claus because he's been a closet gay all his life and also put a roach in his hands.

How reliable a source of knowledge is Wikipedia?

What's missing in this picture is the laptopper on the park bench, they're all at the public library. Do a typical google search on any subject under the sun, say twerking or the Skunkape, and wiki is ALWAYS the first or second entry. Is this scholastically justified though? It's like the Amazon.com of Knowledge, links leading to hyperlinks, a veritable feast for the mind but is the whole enterprise shaky?

The very liberal NYC Mayoral race

The very not-afraid-to-say-it liberal Bill de Blasio is leading the Democratic pack to replace Bloomberg. You'd think Stop 'n' Frisk were the most important issue facing NYers as they're all running ads against the practice but de Blasio is also touting in commercials he's gonna tax the rich more in order to pay for after-school programs. The thought occured though doesn't he need the rich vote too as there's quite a few of them on the upper sides of the Island? Christine Quinn the Speaker of the NYC Council is second or third in the polling I've seen and Bill Thompson is right there with her and because he's black he's gotten certain major endorsements from other key blacks like the Rev. Calvin Butts. Anthony Weiner is one of them lower-tier candidates always around 8% although he has interesting positions like stop the ban on gay men donating blood at the same time touting the conservative position of more discipline in the public schools. I really don't think NYers are all that jazzed up about the Republican side with Catsimitidis of Gristedes fame and former MTA Chairman Joe Lhota who said he wouldn't hold up the subway lines for a couple of damn kittens. For Comptroller all Scott Stringer has to do is put ads against Spitzer saying "I'm the normal guy." Oh God though am I glad to see Bloomberg go! can't you just picture him on one of them court shows?

Chris Christie, gay politics and 016

I've heard of gay conversion therapy and feel folks should be legally able to freely choose it as their therapy of choice.  In NJ Gov. Chris Christie just signed a law banning the practice and the focus seemed to be parents choosing it for their children.  By my math Christie doesn't go very far in the Republican primaries in 016.  We already know he's not appealing to the more socially conservative base but he's also gonna turn off the more libertarian element in the party who'll see his actions as increasing the power of the State to direct parents re the moral and social upbringing of their children.  As usual Saty and BB will completely miss the point on this one and my smartphone should be burning up later.  Oh btw I had to abort Publius last night.

The Ole Gray Lady, for my money the most biased paper in America

Media bias is often in the eye of the beholder but I think it's getting harder to deny. The homepage of my mobile browser has been revamped nicely and so I clicked on the NY Times mobile site and read this and there seemed a most definite skewing. The debate is not a new one and it's not really like I mind media bias just be upfront about it. If FOX swings to the Right and provides a kind of counterweight to the predominant leftward tilt of the press it would seem to be a good thing like a menu.  Media bias, why care?

The Next Generation

When I was a kid I was out there collecting snakes, with today's kids it's the iPad. Playing on Mom's smartphone the next gen is gonna be more techno-literate than I was. Having this discussion here recently should the Gov't teach kids about sex or Mom and Dad? Well today there's a third option - Siri.

I don't care what you do (but I also don't wanna know)

Call it libertarian respect, a kind of social compact/truce that has worked down through the years.  A few famous people these days seem to be applying the Angelina Jolie Template customized of course to their respective diseases/ailments (mainly cancer though) and we hear all about the nexus of their disease and their lifestyle choices.  Let's say in an interview a well-known person, some household name says "every time I hang upside down and someone sticks a thumb up my ass I get cancer,"  don't wanna know, not a public service imo.  Don't wanna hear PSAs about every sex act known to man.  IF Celebrity Q a woman likes to guzzle it down like a milkshake but then it gives her problems down the road, cancer of the stomach kind of deal DON'T WANNA KNOW.  Bob Dole was brave on the battlefield but I don't think he was brave about ED, he was just TMIing.  So I walk in the supermarket the other day and the newsstand is right there and I'm just standing there for about 15 or 20 seconds looking at the cover of one of the papers and the produce guy and I are talking about IT.  People call it heroic I call it TMI.  The Angelina Jolie Thing stands on its own don't try to use it, that's her you just like to share.  The orals the anals don't need it on the cover of TIME or Newsweek when I'm checking out.  Let's nip this one in the bud before it pops up all over the place.  Look I don't care but I also don't wanna know ok?

Another medical thread - Angelina Jolie

There's been an outpouring of public and celebrity support for her and the Twitterverse really cares.  Hollywood is really patting itself on the back but let's get one thing straight, Angelina Jolie is not coming across as your typical Hollywood airhead and not too many celebrities can even write a decent Op-Ed piece in the Ole Gray Lady.  Writing about her recent decision to get a preventative double mastectomy she's definitely adding substance to the discussion and I find her much more useful than K-Dash or even Madonna.  She's also hopefully helping us move past our national Hefnerized adolescence, a culture obsessed with boob jobs and longtime love interest Brad Pitt is coming across as noble, as being a good character.  I don't have a good knowledge of this area, BRCA 1&2 and the 87% chance of breast cancer and 50% chance for ovarian and all that so I'm rendering a nondecision here.  IMO breast cancer gets far more press and attention than say prostate cancer, that's another issue but having said that I find her quite articulate in her cause.  This ain't a case of Sean Penn writing down his deepest thoughts with crayons or Rodman palling around with the North Korean Psycho and so since we've been covering alot of medical ground here lately I've been thinking of starting the Z-man Foundation for the Research and Cure of Tinnitus.  I also never got the whole current conservative fixation with reading NY Times editorials, as an old Times ad used to say read what you like.

Some more post-Newtown thoughts,

since it's still percolating out there and the state of CT has just passed some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation.  I only thought I'd do another Newtown thread if I have any fresh insights and so let's begin with the mathematics of Newtown.  Now all these massacres of late within the last several years are being lumped together somehow but in the vast majority of shooting massacres grown adults are the victims.  That's tragic enough but what happened at Sandy Hook is on another level totally IMO, a kind of existential quirk.  In fact it's bizarre and I don't think there's a snapshot anywhere of Adam Lanza where he's not a bug-eyed bastard, such a joyless individual.  Now the math angle, if you gun-controllers want to prevent another gun massacre ok but if your goal here is to prevent another Sandy Hook you're trying to prevent something that may not happen in another 150 years or ever for that matter.  Another point - how did the post-Newtown debate/discussion somehow evolve into ONLY talking about guns and gun control with a healthy side of mental health and no mention of DRUGS whatsoever?  meds, PCP, bath salts, prescription abuse, airplane glue, whatever but it's high past time authorities lay it all on the table so maybe we can have that other discussion.  One senses just another generic post-gun massacre political debate with an angle or two being deliberately suppressed and I've been wondering why.  Lastly since I'm trying to be fresh in this blog, to look at these things from another angle when you post comments I'd like some fresh and original thoughts too, maybe give yourself an aerial view of the issues instead of same-old same-old, left/right-wing talking points.  NRA Bad, ok we get that but how can you legislate exactly against or to prevent the tragically bizarre which is what Newtown was?  Conclusion: I'm not disagreeing with you about gun control per se but could Sandy Hook have been prevented?  I'm gonna go with a no:)  

The Newtown Speech - Obama and Faith

The President's address last night at the interfaith prayer vigil in Newtown CT was by turns excellent, moving, inspiring, powerful, poignant and even theologically advanced.  As a conservative at odds with the president most of the time it seems these days it was still possible to have a certain amount of pride yesterday evening.  The flourishing of faith in small towns like Newtown is heartening to see even in the wake of such an unspeakable tragedy and only the most secular liberal would have been uncomfortable last night.  Folks there aren't damning God to the heavens or asking the immemorial question where was He?  I've never been to the quaint bucolic town of Newtown myself but have visited quite often the surrounding communities many times on day trips.  New Milford up Super-7 where they recently redid some of the main drag and there's their berry farm in the springtime, Stew Leonard's at Danbury a really great food experience, the Danbury Mall of course off 84 and Dick's Sporting Goods a new addition, New Fairfield and Candlewood Lake/Squantz Pond, the winding roads of Sherman......it's become one of my favorite places to spend the better part of a day and there's just something about the name Aunt Hack Road a side road off of 6 in Danbury.  When you like a certain geographical area you develop almost a mystical connection to it speaking of which every now and then I'd go to the Marian Shrine dedicated to Our Lady of Lourdes just off of Rte. 202 downaways on 25 which actually right here at this main intersection you see signs there directing you to Newtown.  This shrine is a beautiful little place to go with a nice grotto with candles and religious statues and of course the Stations of the Cross on a gentle hill with a large dark wooden cross of Christ at the apex and then lo and behold you're almost in somebody's backyard.  All of this section of upper Connecticut is quite country with the exception of Main Street in the City of Danbury which even though there's a definite touch of squalor here there's something nice about it too and then there's the nearby town of Bethel with a quite large literal supermarket of wine and spirits.  I guess I'm one of the few conservatives who liked Obama's speech last night judging by what Hannity was saying just now on my drive over to the library.  I watched a good part of the memorial with a couple fellow conservatives and even they seemed to be softening and they're no fans of the administration.  I'm saving alot more for the Comments Section but I really think it was a defining moment on the eve of his second term. 

Obama Priorities - the Rich but what about the prevalence of guns in society?

It was one of those nonissues during the campaign and Romney didn't have much to say on the matter either.  I'm talking of course about guns and not the well-to-do on which there were plenty of thoughts.  I'm kinda more concerned lately with the threat posed by guns in society and not so much on those individuals/families/entities making more than $250,000/yr. not paying their fair share.  There was lately a shootup in some mall in Portland, OR.  Before that there was of course the Batman/Movie Theater Massacre in Aurora CO.  There was most recently some weird guy who shot and killed three Brooklyn shopkeepers and he said the CIA put him up to it and then just the other day the brazen Midtown Hitman attack in broad daylight in NYC this in probably one of the most heavily surveilled cities in the world today.  Just today at about 9:30 in the morning a 20-yr. old gunman opened fire on a couple of first-grade classrooms in an elementary school in bucolic Newtown CT killing 26 people including 20 children.  The gunman is now deceased but he was armed with three firearms and wore a bulletproof vest.  Historically it ranks as the second deadliest massacre after VA Tech and Newtown is quite close to the Danbury Mall so there are alot of open questions about the gunman's motivations/psychology here and why he chose a helpless group of first-graders instead of the usual throng of Christmas shoppers. 

My position on guns and gun control is rather complex and I've enough to say on the matter to piss off both sides.  I'm not against all gun control measures, would probably support many of them but also recognize their limited effectiveness.  Liberals talk as if this is the magical solution, would that this were so.  Put simply only honest law-abiding people obey laws, criminals don't that's why they're known as criminals in the first place.  Pass all the gun control measures you want and criminals will still get ahold of guns and continue to maim and kill, that's basic existential reality.  I could fill a whole blogpage with my thoughts on the subject and they ramble in all political directions at times but bottom line is Obama seems to care more about the wealthy these days and the apparent threat they pose to the country.  I wish he were just as concerned about the prevalence of guns in our society but we can't have that discussion right now because of the Fiscal Cliff.  Obama if he were a more mature and reasoned leader, not still running a campaign could have helped put all that behind us and on to more pressing matters like, say Guns in Our Society and I'd like to hear President Obama's response on the tragedy in Newtown CT and also what his mouthpiece Jay Carney has to say I mean if they have the time since the wealthy are taking up so much of their attention lately.  There will be the usual obligatory pro-forma statements of course but you would think they would at least question some of their own political obsessions/fixations of late, sober up.  The poor will always be with us and so will the wealthy and there will always be time for those discussions but the dead remain the dead.

Your thoughts? (and don't be surprised if I might agree with you at times).

The 3rd & Final Debate, foreign and domestic repairs

It took but half an hour or twenty minutes or so before businessman Romney veered off into more comfortable domestic terrain, done on purpose and killed a small block of time and Obama happily took the bait (geez Dad can we rap about birth control again?  I see an opening!).  Not exactly two Kissingers squaring off against each other and sure enough Obama obliquely got his pills in (I'm beginning to think he takes bc pills himself) when he said Romney has social policies more from the '50s, a Mormon cross between Robert Young and Leave It To Beaver but onto to Syria and some other more pressing matters.  Bashar al-Assad to date has killed about 30,000 of his own citizens, brings to mind Stalin's old quip that one death is a tragedy 30,000 is a statistic to paraphrase.  Obama kept talking sanctions up the kazoo whereas Romney agreed but said while there would be no military involvement under his administration we really need to arm the rebels the right ones anyway.  I pretty much watched the whole thing with a quick sidetrip for a whizz and a refill and in my notes there's everything.  Obama took out Osama bin Laden which in a foreign policy debate is perfectly fair to point out and also somehow took out Khadafy.  The evening started out with Mideast terror/Benghazi of course and perhaps the best line of the evening was when Romney said we can't kill ourselves out of this terror situation but really need to engage the Muslim world to reject extremism (hey Sat the real War Against Women can best be capsulized in the pic of little Malala recuperating in her British hospital room, just thought I'd get that in).  So how'd that reset go with Putin Mr. Obama?  Romney sees Putin more as a geopolitical foe, I see him as nostalgic for the Cold War and not wanting to move on but Obama somehow sees him in less menacing terms, dunno.  Iraq, status of forces agreements, the Red Line with Iran, future talks between the U.S. and Iran not being true, tensions with Israel which even many Dems are concerned about, Obama's global apology tour.  Geez this blogpost is beginning to resemble an updated version of We Didn't Start the Fire.  Rom's feeling is that the world's worst leaders saw weakness in Obama and this made events in the world worse and yeah China was ripe for discussion (we'll save that for the comments section).  Leaving Afghanistan in '014 (we hope) and Romney was quite straight about Pakistan being an ally after all they have about 100 nuclear warheads and if Pakistan somehow became a failed state we wouldn't want them getting into the wrong hands.  DRONES, education, a strong economy and the overwhelming need for a strong military which in my view Obama seemed particularly weak on, kind of stammered.  I finally figured out the media's formula for determining the winner in these things, if Obama didn't do horribly then he won.  Of the three debates this was the most pivotal imo.  Of course when I go to my e-mail later and find out who's trending today on Yahoo I may revise that.  Oh yeah Bob Schieffer a class act:) 

Maybe he had a fight with his wife

Cramps? or maybe Obama's strategy last night at the First Debate in Colorado was to keep his head down to make Romney look like he's picking on the black guy.  By universal acclamation Romney won the debate and even Chris Matthews said he was excellent.  Jeff Greenfield said Obama seemed clueless about the most basic political points and many feel Obama should have went after Romney on his 47% comments and Bain Capital.  Oh I know what it was he was depressed about that Samuel Jackson video.  The economy, taxes, job creation and education and Jim Lehrer as moderator, get the nachos out.  I don't get why Savage keeps calling Lehrer a baggy-eyed Bolshevik and other conservatives like Michelle Malkin hate the guy but at any rate Rom was up-tempo, controlled the direction of the debate and was aggressive this according to the Today Show which I popped on this morning because truth be told I deliberately surfed right past the debate on most channels but even here some new Chinese digital station was covering it from Beijing so I got some snippets in English.  OK so Romney didn't exactly speak as an arch-conservative and won't exactly win the hearts of the Ron Paulians, not even sure who they're voting for.  He denied Obama's $5 trillion in tax cuts assertion and said there's a place for government in health care, that's not exactly hardcore libertarianism.  Axelrod said Romney's was a strong performance but still a performance so that's one of them half-compliments.  Look Obama has very strong base support whereas Rom is going for the 7% swing, he's a swinger and Obama's a baseman.  O's weak performance won't affect his base of course, it was more embarrassment than abandonment.  Clearly though when Chris Matthews no longer gets The Tingle in his left nut something's wrong:)

The Hunger Games

I bought the DVD at a FYE store yesterday and wasn't sure I'd even like the movie due to its overly dark and disturbing material, kind of reminds me of Shirley Jackson's The Lottery and then there was the matter of protagonist Katniss Everdeen, how can you make a heroine out of someone who participates in the madness and kills other people?  Once I started watching The Hunger Games though my views slowly changed.  It became obvious that those teens Katniss killed were at the root evil to begin with and she had to defend herself.  The Hunger Games based on the first book in a trilogy by American YA writer Suzanne Collins is a kind of prophetic hybrid of Lord of the Flies and 1984 with a healthy dose of Serling.  I've often thought of why don't we have literary classics anymore but with the themes here that hearken back to elements in those earlier works I can see the potential for a classic itself here, a future item on a high-schooler's reading list.  So what is the interpretation?  First off I agree with Beth who blogged about this once and I hope she takes time out to join the discussion here and so I do see it as a kind of cautionary tale against Big Government and in the comments section I'll delve more into that.  Yes of course it's a kind of satire of the reality TV craze and all.  When things in the 74th annual Hunger Games get a little boring for the viewers at home the staff at the central control panels first add a blazing forest fire to get Katniss closer to her adversaries and later on noontime eerily turns into nightfall and three large black and frightening attack dogs that look like a cross between a pitbull and a panther are added to the mix, so much for playing fair.  The president of Panem played by Donald Sutherland says to one of the younger bosses, not sure what his role is exactly and they all look weird but he says to him early on to watch this Katniss character as she represents hope and hope is stronger than fear and it may be a spark now but to contain it.  The Hunger Games as well can be Glenn Beck's worst nightmares come to fruition.  There is also the theme of the star-crossed lovers Katniss and Peeta the other teen chosen from her District 12 and the two are willing to die at the end by eating the poisonous nightberries until a Voice comes from the sky telling them to stop the Games are over and they're the victors.  Then there's the central enigma of the movie, WHY do the 24 teens chosen HAVE TO kill each other?  Did the Powers-That-Be mandate this?  I didn't catch that.  Of course they could have all just teemed together to survive so there's some powerful philosophical and theological observations going on here about human nature itself, about the nature of Good and Evil and you could say maybe it was all just one big vast social experiment besides being a form of perverse entertainment.  I have to say this is really a great and thought-provoking movie well-suited for the action/adventure format and there's so many political angles to this thing so let's get started...... 

The real problem with Higher Education

Sometimes conservatives overly misdiagnose the Problem.  For instance you'd think there was a veritable epidemic of bad teachers in the NYC public schools system and for this reason teacher ratings and evaluations need to be made public not tomorrow but NOW.  Conservatives love this particular bandwagon but I say it's the kids, home-training.  With Higher Education, colleges and universities conservatives say the problem is liberal bias.  Well yeah there's some of that, having two years of college under my belt you could sense it from time to time but I really don't care, whatever floats your boat.  You have a political leaning well if the students know where you're coming from I don't see the problem but the real problem in a nutshell is that colleges and universities make you take courses you're never gonna use in Life.  Went to that Catholic institution for two years and they made us take an advanced math class so this older white-haired priest is writing calculus equations on the board, really breezing along with his chalk and I'm like what in hell? I'm never gonna use this in my day-to-day.  Then we had to go to the college bookstore on the corner of course and buy our own textbooks which cost a small fortune and I remember thinking back then in high school the class that just made it to the next grade just passed their books down to the next generation of students gratis.  What a racket!  One of my younger male managers going back a few years said after high school he just wanted to dive right into the workforce, make money and so he went with chefing and avoided the whole higher education experience.  Practical skills you learn by actually doing, how to make money, interacting with people and customers and learning new trades on the spot.  Better for the economy.  I'm glad to see a few conservatives like Maggie Gallagher more or less put down the whole college experience as a serious waste of time, you're gonna spend years paying back that student loan and what exactly are you gonna do with that advanced art or history degree anyway?  Education is one of the most controversial issues in this country, everyone has an opinion.  I say kids don't need to be taught how to masturbate just how to make the dinars:)

Last Tuesday's recall vote in Wisconsin

I didn't blog about it at the time the goings on in Wisconsin when Republican Governor Scott Walker was ripping public-sector unions a new one, I like to go my own way when I blog but as you all know by now Walker won last Tuesday's recall vote 53% to Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett's 46% this despite practically every major union in the country making an all-out effort there to mete out justice and if you read the fine print about 1/3 of Walker's support came from union households.  His sins? he pretty much put the kabosh on collective-bargaining and public-employee workers now have to chip in more towards their pensions and health care and no more automatic deductions for union dues.  Before all this the recall of the GOP-controlled Senate also failed as did the effort to get rid of a conservative State Supreme Court justice and that was just a warmup for the Walker treatment.  So does this spell the death knell for unions? if there's enough Governors out there like Walker probably but I don't think the country is in as much of a union state of mind as back in the day.  For some reason when I think of unions I think of Jimmy Hoffa.

Over the past several years I worked with at least two young managers both men and it was quite obvious from their remarks they hated unions this despite our jobs in the food industry being heavily unionized.  So what was their #1 complaint?  I know when you talk about labor and politics the subject gets complicated but it was no more complex than when you have a union you can't FIRE somebody and let's face it in most workplaces there are definitely at least a couple of people who need to be shown the door at least this is the way the free market is supposed to work, better for everyone.  I can come up with at least two names myself right off the bat and so this is the #1 complaint even over and above fiscal concerns.  Good God have you been reading about the sexual goings-on between some HS teachers and their students in NYC? that's not even the point, sexuality has always been somewhat warped to begin with but it's existentially difficult to fire the tenured ones because...it gets complicated here.  There's a section on it in Glenn Beck's book Arguing with Idiots and ya gotta collect and collate your evidence first, get your witnesses and present your charges of course to this board or body or that and then all that has to finally go to an arbitrator at least some point down the road into the not-so-foreseeable future and even then the arbitrator for some strange reason often has a soft spot for the more pervy ones.  NYC Schools Chancellor Dennis Walcott would like the sole power to fire the truly bad ones but he has to lobby Albany first, that takes time and you know how that goes and the United Federation of Teachers likes the system the way it is after all they fought for it.  I don't recall this going on when I went to school as a young'en but then again we had nuns who'd crack a ruler over a student's knuckles so unless you were seriously into some S&M or a little clothespin action......

Pretty much in my place the only straight up reason you can fire somebody is if they steal something:)