“This is no different than the maintenance guy moving it out there….”
Except…
Trump always sides with himself.
Crazy; I just get on a call with my doctor and they email my employer. All covered by insurance and I pay nothing and take no time off.
If my employer did anything about it like fire me, they’d get reported to the government who would prosecute with minimal involvement from me other than a statement and possibly witness testimony.
But if an employee says “I need to take a week’s medical leave, here’s a note from my doctor…” the employer doesn’t know the reason and can’t fire the person, right? I’m just failing to see how this can mutate into something worse. Or are you saying it’s common practice in the US for employers to deny medical leave?
Slams implies alcohol consumption doesn’t it? And blasts implies some sort of physical or metaphorical explosion.
What’s wrong with “denounces” or “disparages” or all those other words that actually have literal meanings?
In the US, are employers really allowed to pry into what type of medical leave an employee is taking?
Hmm… is there such a thing as a lame duck congress?
I can just imagine the GOP congress refusing to pass anything after a D wave is elected, effectively killing all government until the end of January.
Perfectly fine. But in the upcoming election, because of FPTP voting and the electoral college, you have one choice: vote Harris or be OK with Trump getting elected.
Doesn’t mean you have to agree with Harris or support her policies. Just means that not voting for her means Trump is just that much more likely to be elected, at which time it doesn’t matter who you voted for, who you endorse, or what personal values you hold.
But those aren’t the only names on the ticket.
My general rule is to vote for individuals at the municipal level, vote first causes at the state level, and vote strategically at the federal level, to get the representatives who will steer policy closest to the direction I want into office. Then comes the letter writing to remind them that I helped elect them, and they still need to win my support by acting in accordance with my values in key areas.
That was a dugong impressive pun….
It’s the same type of people who were against seatbelt regulations in the 1970s and helmet laws for motorcycles and bicycles later on.
People who only want to live in a society when the benefit to them is immediately obvious.
Still?
Cuba hasn’t sponsored terrorism in decades….
When I was in that age bracket, I identified as conservative. Over the years, my positions have become increasingly conservative, and I find myself classified by many as a flaming socialist.
So this isn’t a new thing; people compare themselves to what they consider normal.
I think what it really shows is that it’s less obvious today what the difference between conservative and (what? liberal? progressive?) is. People tend to know more what they aren’t than what they are when they’re young. If they reject something that’s considered liberal, they must be conservative.