May I draw your attention to...

Something to think about

2005-12-22T22:07:00.000-08:00

Even though the NYC transit strike is over, here is an interesting perspective on the situation.

On Aug. 3, 1981, nearly 12,000 air-traffic controllers defied President Ronald Reagan's warnings and federal law by going on strike. Nearly half of the nation'a flights were grounded. Speaking from the Rose Garden, Reagan--the former president of his own union--issued a 48-hour ultimatum:

"This morning at 7 a.m. the union representing those who man America's air traffic control facilities called a strike...

Let me make one thing plain. I respect the right of workers in the private sector to strike. Indeed, as president of my own union, I led the first strike ever called by that union. I guess I'm maybe the first one to ever hold this office who is a lifetime member of an AFL - CIO union. But we cannot compare labor-management relations in the private sector with government. Government cannot close down the assembly line. It has to provide without interruption the protective services which are government's reason for being.

It was in recongition of this that the Congress passed a law forbidding strikes by government employees against the public safety. Let me read the solemn oath taken by each of these employees, a sworn affidavit, when they accepted their jobs: 'I am not participating in any strike against the Government of the United States or any agency thereof, and I will not so participate while an employee of the Government of the United States or any agency thereof.''

It is for this reason that I must tell those who fail to report for duty this morning they are in violation of the law, and if they do not report for work within 48 hours, they have forfeited their jobs and will be terminated."

Two days later, Reagan fired the 11,355 air-traffic controllers who had not returned to work.

I have mixed feelings about the strike. There is no clearly defined right and wrong. I support a union's right to strike. But I think that the union miscalculated the risks and benefits of this particular strike. Workers lost 6 days worth of pay in fines and the union itself was fined 3 million dollars. And all they got out of it was a demonstration of strength and power, showing that they are not afraid to make short-term sacrifices for potentially long term benefits--important demonstrations, but not necessarily worth all the lost money.

The Reagan speech above doesn't necessarily sway me one way or the other, but it does put an interesting spin on the argument. Reagan's involvement as a former union president provides an increased level of legitamcy to his anti-strike argument. In addition, his reading of the oath that public employees take--something that I hadn't heard mentioned by any media outlet--does make me think twice about whether public employees should be allowed to strike at all. Previously, I had been quite confident that it was their right to strike just like any other union employee. Even after hearing the public employee's oath, I still believe that public service unions have that right. But it does make me think twice about it.

What's Wrong with our Legal System?

2005-12-22T09:05:00.001-08:00

Our legal system isn't perfect. Never has been, never will be. But after a while you start to almost accept it and look past its imperfections. So what if OJ got off for murder? It happens. At least he was good at football. And those Naked Gun movies? Pure gold.

But every once in a while the courts do something so mind numbingly bizarre that you have to ask yourself: Is Canada really that bad of an alternative?

I found myself pondering such a question upon reading a report that a New Mexico state judge granted a Sante Fe woman a restraining order against "Late Show" host David Letterman for--are you ready?--"using code words to show he wanted to marry her and train her as his co-host." Ms. Colleen Nestler alleged in a request filed last Thursday that, since May 1994, Letterman has forced her to go bankrupt and caused her "mental cruelty" and "sleep deprivation."

But wait, there's more. The restraining order calls for Letterman to stay at least 3 yards away from Nestler, not to think of her, and to "release [her] from his mental harassment and hammering." All this because Letterman, according to Nestler, used code words like "Oprah" to talk to her from his show, even asking her to be his wife by saying, "Marry me, Oprah."

Now, by no means am I criticizing this woman. She has every right to be insane. More power to her if she thinks the little man in the black box is using code words to propose marriage. But what in the world is a state judge doing granting her a restraining order? Why would he even consider legitimizing her claims and wasting the state's time and money? When all is said and done and the woman's restraining order is thrown out--which, I hope, is any day now--someone better get this judge some legit mental counseling.

You Gotta Love this Guy

2005-12-20T20:33:00.000-08:00

As you might have realized by now, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a little bit nuts. While your normal president has a number of small and reperable controversies throughout his presidency--you know, like starting a war based on non-existent weapons of mass destruction or lying to his country and wife about 'happy hour' in the oval office, Mr. Ahmadinejad has taken presidential controversy to another level. In his first term in office, Ahmadinejad has compiled quite an impressive resume of controversy. He has: threatened the Western World with the production of nuclear weapons, denied the Holocaust, and declared that the state of Israel should be "wiped off the map." And this is just since August.

In his latest move, Ahmadinejad has banned all Western music from state TV and radio stations. The official Iran Persian Daily reported on Monday that Ahmadinejad, as head of the Supreme Cultural Revolutionary Council, ordered the enactment of an October ruling to ban all Western music, including classical music, on state broadcast outlets.

While this might seem shocking to us Western music listeners, the ruling fits in quite nicely with other Iranian music laws. In Iran women are prohibited from singing in public, except to a female-only audience or when singing in a chorus. Hard-line Iranians have been afraid that the voice of a woman soloist might "arouse impure thoughts in men." Makes sense, doesn't it?

But sensible or not, Ahmadinejad continues on his quest to step on as many toes as possible in as little time as possible. First it was the UN, then it was the state of Israel, then it was the Jewish People, and now it's the Backstreet Boys and Mozart. Something tells me that we've only seen the beginning of this man's lunacy. I guess we'll just have to stay tuned...