Thursday, October 13, 2016
Limbaugh: 'Ironic That The Democrat Party Wants to Throw Down the Morality Card'
The release of an 11-year-old videotape in which Donald Trump speaks in vulgar terms about trying to seduce women has prompted outrage among Democrats, some Republicans, and the liberal media, but it's hard to believe they're really offended, Rush Limbaugh said on Monday.
"You know, I find it ironic that the Democrat Party wants to throw down the morality card. The Democrat Party, which is responsible for the dissolution of morality in this country. The Democrat Party, which is for all these progressive new attitudes in our culture, and now all of a sudden acting like a bunch of prudes, acting like, 'Oh, my God, I have never been this outraged. Oh, this is just beyond the pale.'
"These are the architects of this kind of stuff. If Trump were a Democrat, they'd be covering it up and privately inviting him to parties and yukking it up," Limbaugh said on Monday's radio show.
"All these people on the left and the media running around outrageously offended? They're not offended in the slightest by what Trump said! They're capitalizing on it. They're the ones that set up this permissive society! They're the ones who have shred the boundaries. They are the ones who have erased... These are the people that take money from people in Hollywood that produce some of the most depraved content we have seen!
"And they celebrate it and they applaud it and they call it great art. And it's far, far more destructive in terms of how it is portrayed than what Trump's talking about on some bus in a studio lot at Access Hollywood. So the hypocrisy on this is tenfold. They get to act like they're righteously indignant and like this is the greatest assault on morality and decency, and these people have presided over the destruction of decency!
"In song lyrics that they produce, music, in books they write, television shows that they produce, movies! For these people to act like they've never heard these words before and never heard them used this way? It's opportunism. It has nothing to do with the issues. It has nothing to do with the future of this country, and my guess is that a slew of Americans are fed up with all of this kind of rotgut determining electoral outcomes, particularly this year."
After the 2005 videotape of Donald Trump caught on a hot microphone was leaked to the Washington Post over the weekend, Trump's rival Hillary Clinton tweeted, “This is horrific. We cannot allow this man to become president.” Her running mate Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), was quoted as saying,“It makes me sick to my stomach.”
Trump told the nation at Monday night's debate he is "very embarrassed" by what he said 11 years ago. "I hate it. But it's locker room talk, and it's one of those things." Later, he told the crowd, "I apologize for those words. But it is things that people say. But what President Clinton did, he was impeached, he lost his license to practice law."
On Monday's radio show, Limbaugh made the point that the political/media establishment will destroy anyone who challenges their grip on power:
"If they were able to demonize Mitt Romney, and they demonized George W. Bush, they'll be able to demonize anybody. If this is the kind of way they go to win elections, they're never going to stop winning elections, if this is all it takes. And I think a number of people have become outraged by this," Limbaugh said.
He continued: "This is what it looks like when you take on the establishment. This is exactly what it looks like. It isn't gonna be pretty. It isn't gonna be clean. It isn't gonna be pristine. The establishment, with everything they are invested in the establishment, remaining the establishment and in power, they are just not gonna sit back and trust this to your votes. They're not gonna trust this to an election, to a campaign. Not gonna trust it at all. They're gonna do everything they can to destroy whoever it is that wants to take control from them.
"And, in the process, they're gonna destroy that person so as to send a message to the next guy, 'Don't even think about it. Don't even try. Look what we did to Donald Trump. Look what we did to whoever,' is the message.
"When this whole thing began -- when it became clear that what this was, was going to be an effort to unseat the elites, the establishment, whatever you want to call 'em -- you have to have a sober understanding of who they are and what it means to them. And they're not just going to throw it open to what they think is a fair election."
How This Nashville Tech Company Challenged a State Regulatory Board and Won
Project Belle connects beauty professionals and prospective clients, who can schedule appointments directly with cosmetologists, massage therapists, manicurists, hair stylists, fashion stylists, and chiropractors for the place of their choosing.
It’s Uber, but for beauty professionals, as the Nashville Business Journal put it.
But in July, the Tennessee Board of Cosmetology and Barber Examiners sent Lauzon and Project Belle a cease-and-desist letter after receiving a complaint from an established Nashville salon owner.
Lauzon, with the help of a lawyer, Daniel Horwitz, fought back on the grounds that Project Belle isn’t a cosmetology shop, but rather a technology company.
And on Monday, the regulatory board dropped its complaint, allowing the company to continue operating.
But even though Lauzon was successful in his challenge, his experience with the Board of Cosmetology and Barber Examiners underscores a broader debate taking place in cities nationwide, as elected officials and regulatory boards try to grapple with a changing economy.
“That’s what this came down to, was competition,” Lauzon told The Daily Signal. “We’re growing really nicely and we’re offering people, workers really, a whole new way to work, and some established interests don’t like that competition.”
Lauzon had the idea for Project Belle after he watched his cousin, a manicurist, struggle to juggle motherhood and work after having a baby.
Beauty professionals who work in brick-and-mortar salons, Lauzon learned, have to adhere to a strict schedule, and many have to “rent” their workspace from that salon, handing over as much as 85 percent of generated revenue.
But Lauzon’s service, which launched in September 2015, eliminates the need for beauty professionals to find space in a salon. With Project Belle, customers connect directly with individual beauty professionals.
Prospective clients can schedule appointments with cosmetologists through Project Belle’s website, and the beauty professional then comes to the home or business, no salon needed.
Project Belle began accepting appointments from customers in December. So far this year, more than 200 customers have booked upward of 500 appointments.
Clients can choose from more than 50 beauty professionals—all of them licensed—listed on Project Belle’s website.
For several months, Project Belle flew under the radar, yet grew rapidly in Nashville.
But in February, the owner of a Nashville salon complained to the Tennessee Board of Cosmetology and Barber Examiners, about the website.
In her complaint, Karen Kops, the owner of a natural nail salon, asked the board to investigate Project Belle, which Kops believed was operating “outside of current state law rules.”
“As a business owner with a brick-and-mortar shop adhering to all state law requirements, I find this type of competition highly disturbing,” Kops wrote in her complaint.
Five months later, a lawyer with the state Board of Cosmetology and Barber Examiners sent Lauzon a notice ordering him to pay a $500 fine and shut down his website.
According to the consent order sent to Lauzon, the board reviewed Project Belle’s website and determined he was allowing licensed beauty professionals to do “in-home work” without having a cosmetology shop license.
Tennessee state law requires that a salon be “placed on a permanent foundation or otherwise rendered immobile,” and because Project Belle’s beauty professionals went to their client’s locations, the Board of Cosmetology and Barber Examiners said the company was breaking the law.
The state has some exceptions for at-home services—if a customer is sick, in a nursing home, or preparing for movie productions, photo sessions, or “similar activities,” for example—but the board said Project Belle didn’t allow customers to verify if their appointment fell into one of the exceptions.
But Lauzon says he doesn’t operate a beauty salon, nor does he perform cosmetology services.
Project Belle is a technology company, he said, one that simply connects licensed cosmetologists to customers. The Tennessee Board of Cosmetology and Barber Examiners doesn’t have jurisdiction over technology companies, his lawyer, Horwitz, wrote in a response to the board.
“Belle’s mission is to empower people to open up their own business with technology and have a flexible profession and career, while at the same time delivering convenience right to clients,” Lauzon said.
“The law in Tennessee clearly states that the board of cosmetology has jurisdiction and oversight over licensed cosmetologists and cosmetology shops. We are definitely neither,” he continued. “We’re a technology provider. We’re a software company. We’re merely a third party that connects these two parties together.”
During a monthly meeting Monday, the Board of Cosmetology and Barber Examiners decided to drop its complaint against Project Belle, and a similar service, Stylist on Call.
The board agreed with Lauzon and said that because both are technology companies, they operate outside of their jurisdiction.
The Board of Cosmetology and Barber Examiners did not return The Daily Signal’s request for comment.
Back Down to Earth
Though the Tennessee Board of Cosmetology and Barber Examiners ultimately decided to allow Project Belle to continue operating, city councils and local officials nationwide have been attempting to respond to the technology companies that have sprouted up in the growing sharing economy.
In Austin, city officials passed ordinances tightening the restrictions on short-term rentals, banning them by 2022 and making it difficult for residents to rent out their homes on websites like Airbnb and HomeAway.
The Texas Public Policy Foundation is currently suing the city on behalf of resident Ahmad Zaatari over its short-term rental ordinances.
Other cities decided to ban ride-hailing services like Uber and Lyft as they began to grow in popularity, which some say was done to protect taxi companies.
Today, though, officials like those in Miami-Dade County, Florida, have voted to overturn those bans.
And in Baltimore, regulations make it nearly impossible for mobile vendors like food trucks to sell their products within city limits. Critics of the rules argue they exist solely to protect brick-and-mortar restaurant owners, and the Arlington, Virginia,-based Institute for Justice filed a lawsuit with food truck owners Joey Vanoni and Nikki McGowan challenging Baltimore’s mobile vending rules.
Regulations like those in Austin, Baltimore, and Nashville, which often affect new competitors entering the markets, stifle innovation and entrepreneurship, Braden Boucek, director of litigation at the Beacon Center of Tennessee, said.
“These are business models that are thinking of new ways to come at established ways of providing services,” he told The Daily Signal, referencing new companies like Uber, Airbnb, and Project Belle. “Part of the reason why they’re advantageous is because they’re a better, more creative way of thinking about it. When you just wrap the old regulations around them, you’re really just bringing them back down to earth and turning them into what they’re trying to innovate beyond.”
Boucek said that instead of addressing new companies on a case-by-case basis, as Tennessee has done with Project Belle, elected officials need to have a larger conversation about the sharing economy.
“Policymakers need to think big on this issue, otherwise it’s going to be having to address these one-by-one as they pop up,” he said. “They need to be thinking about laying the groundwork for the new economy and ushering in a new chapter of flourishment for both people and the economy.”
Following the American Dream
Since Project Belle began accepting appointments in December, Lauzon said his business has grown by 40 percent month-to-month.
For his customers, Lauzon said Project Belle is opening up access to beauty services, especially for those who are disabled or elderly.
One Project Belle client, he said, is an 80-year-old woman in a wheelchair who has a hard time with mobility. But she’s able to schedule beauty services through the website, and her cosmetologist comes directly to her home.
Lauzon said that was “life changing” for the elderly woman, and that’s something the Board of Cosmetology and Barber Examiners didn’t realize.
“There’s a large group of people who cannot get [these services] right now,” he said. “I think what Belle is doing is really meeting and discovering this unmet need and serving it to people and helping both sides of the marketplace—the clients and the professionals—in a meaningful way.”
And Project Belle isn’t only changing the game for clients, but for beauty professionals, too.
His service allows cosmetologists, fashion stylists, chiropractors, and massage therapists to set their own schedules, determine their own pricing, and put more of the money they make into their own pockets.
Project Belle handles the marketing, payment, and bookings for each beauty professional, and keeps 15 percent of each transaction.
Lauzon said that freelancing, as those stylists on Project Belle do, brings more competition to the market, which not only pushes employees to change their business practices, but also lowers prices for consumers.
“Professionals should be able to freelance in a way that they see fit, and whether that’s with us or by themselves, we think that everyone has that right. The law as it stands does not allow that,” he said. “[Project Belle is] safe for now, but we want all professionals in the state to be safe and have the ability to follow the American dream.”
Lauzon plans to continue to grow Project Belle in Nashville and is working with state lawmakers to change Tennessee’s laws regarding mobile services, which he says gives brick-and-mortar salons the upper hand over cosmetologists.
He also recognizes that when Project Belle expands to other cities outside of the state in the future, Lauzon may be facing regulatory boards like the Tennessee Board of Cosmetology and Barber Examiners who want to keep new companies from competing against established market participants.
But that won’t deter him.
“We’re going to be proving why it’s a good thing to change and liberalize and allow more competition, allow more workers freedom, and allow consumers to choose,” Lauzon said. “At the end of the day, consumers really deserve that choice.”
Jeanine Pirro Says America Is Too Politically Correct During Steubenville Speech
Fox News legal analyst Jeanine Pirro blasted what she views as an overabundance of political correctness in America and claimed the Black Lives Matter movement was created “to rip this country apart” during a speech Monday at Steubenville High School.
During her hour-long address in the latest installment of the Herald-Star Speaker Series, Pirro — host of “Justice with Judge Jeanine” — also called Donald Trump’s lewd comments about women from a 2005 video “despicable,” but said there’s a difference between words and actual action.
“This election is about the establishment versus an outsider.
“I have never seen our country as divided as it is today,” said Pirro, who attended the presidential debate in St. Louis on Sunday night.
“The candidates walked onto the stage Sunday night. Hillary was nervous, and Bill (Clinton) was nervous. I thought Donald did a good job. He is my friend. What he said (in the video) was despicable. But he never did anything. There is a difference between words and putting them into action. What is at stake here is this country and where we are headed.”
Pirro said “what is happening in Washington is corruption personified.”
“Bernie Sanders lost (the Democratic primary) because the superdelegate system is rigged. Bernie Sanders said he was a socialist, and they loved him. If Bernie Sanders had won that election, the millenials would have put him in office because they are stupid. We have to take this country back,” she said.
Pirro is a former district attorney in New York who grew up in Elmyra, N.Y.
“I worked in the family dairy and went to Catholic schools. I knew I wanted to go to law school, but I didn’t want to be a defense attorney. I wanted to defend the victims. I went to law school to learn about truth and justice. The first thing I saw was women and children were not treated equally,” she said.
Pirro also said America must get tougher on immigration.
“We can’t ban people from our country based on their religion. But we can ban people based on their background,” Pirro said. “Local officials are not being told where the refugees are being sent in this country. You would think other Arab countries would take them but they aren’t.
“We are fighting a theology that believes they should control every part of government. … We could have identified terrorists if we weren’t so scared of being called an Islamophobe. Russia told us about the Boston bombers and the FBI didn’t listen.”
She answered questions submitted by the sold-out audience, including a request for advice from new police officers.
“I have worked with cops for 30 years. The vast majority of America loves you, appreciates you and honors you. You have to take care of each other.
“This Black Lives Matter (movement) is nothing more than an anarchist organization to rip this country apart. Michael Brown in Ferguson, (Mo.), was nothing more than a thug. He got what he deserved. Be true to the badge and be true to yourself,” Pirro said.
“It is about right or wrong and truth and justice. Cops are the line of difference between anarchy and civilization. We have to fight the heroin crisis. It is about making judges accountable and people accountable,” she added.
Is It Legal To Smack Your Child?
The Australian situation
It’s a controversial topic but there are many parents out there who prefer to give their kids a smack as a way to discipline them. Some parents find hitting a child, no matter how softly you do it, absolutely deplorable. But is smacking your kids even legal? We have the answer.
Wooden spoons were once the weapon of choice for mothers who wanted to physically punish their children. My mum was a seamstress and preferred a long, thick wooden ruler used to measure fabric. These days, time-poor parents use a quick smack, often delivered in the heat of the moment when their children are behaving badly.
In a poll of nearly 1400 Australians by News Corp, 75.7% considered it acceptable to smack children as a way to deter them from misbehaving. Meanwhile 39.5% said they would be furious if they see their friends smack their kids.
It’s definitely a controversial topic but according to the law, it’s not illegal to smack your children in Australia. However, there are conditions. According to the Australian Institute Of Family Studies:
“In some jurisdictions a parent’s right to use corporal punishment is provided for in legislation (e.g., New South Wales), while in others it is provided for by the common law (“judge-made law”) (e.g., Victoria). All Australian states and territories condone (in principle) the use of force by a parent, by way of correction, towards a child.”
For example, in NSW, prior to 2002 it was up to judges to decide what kind of physical punishment was acceptable. Since the state introduced the Crimes Amendment (Child Protection Physical Measures Act, there is now clarification on what kind of physical punishment is permissible on a child.
According to the amendment, it’s okay to use physical force on a child provided that it “was reasonable having regard to the age, health, maturity or other characteristics of the child, the nature of the alleged misbehaviour or other circumstances”. Also, you can’t hit them above the neck or “any other part of the body of the child in such a way as to be likely to cause harm to the child that lasts for more than a short period”.
Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.
American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of other countries. The only real difference, however, is how much power they have. In America, their power is limited by democracy. To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges. They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did: None. So look to the colleges to see what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way. It would be a dictatorship.
For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and DISSECTING LEFTISM. My Home Pages are here or here or here. Email me (John Ray) here.