awesome ultimate expert hen (mdyesowitch) wrote,
awesome ultimate expert hen

  • Mood:

A long way to go

First, I know everyone is waiting with baited breath for my updated voting decisions as we move closer to election day. I watched the debate and came up with idea that everyone running is angry and bitter, and this race is contentious, and the choices are all bleh. So, no decision on that front. I've got an email out to Jill's brother David to find out why he likes Deval Patrick. So far, he hasn't responded, which I'm discovering is rather typical of Patrick supporters who want you to frame their arguments, but can't tell you what makes Patrick so engaging. (Cos and Katie, if you're listening, this is a direct challenge. Give me a reason to vote dem...please. Tell me what you like about this guy, why he should be elected.)

And Issues:
Question 1: I know I said I was voting Yes before, but I've had some conversation in the meantime that convinces me that this isn't a lightening of the blue laws, as I originally thought, but a scam on behalf of the wine industry to sell more wine. Which I'm generally in favor of. But I see no reason to create a wine only class of liquour license for grocery stores. To me it's just more paperwork for the government to shuffle though. If it allowed sales of all alcohol, it might be a easier sell. As it is, with the direct shipping bill going through the legislature, I don't need to buy wine at the grocery store. I can order directly from the vendors. I'd much rather do that. So NO on question 1.

Question 2: No change.

And question 3: You'll remember that I was waiting for an email from my friend Andy who runs a childcare facility, to tell me what would be most beneficial to her. Having no children myself (I bet you guys didn't know that.), I'm going to judge the issue through her eyes, because I figure what's good for Andy is good for small childcare businesses and in the lack of any formed opinions of my own, I might as well do what's good for my buddy. After all, patronism is a part of Mass culture, and I fully embrace it.
This is an important e-mail as this ballot question could seriously determine whether or not people like me (and including me) are able to continue to run our childcare businesses! I do not wish to tell anyone how to vote. However, I do want you to know how this ballot question could effect Family Childcare, possibly even to the point of making it impossible for individual provider's like myself to continue to provide childcare due to the costs that could be added to our businesses if this law passes. You should vote how you want of course, but I would like to urge you to vote "No" on this question, and to pass this info. along to your friends!!!
Ballot Question #3 Directly effects all FCC providers. If passed this law would:
1. Mandate that the state bargain in good faith with an "employee organization" for FCC
2. Give one "employee organization" exclusive bargaining rights on behalf of FCC
3. Allow the "employee organization" to charge FCC monthly dues of an undetermined amount regardless of whether they wish to belong to that organization
4. Still require legislative appropriations and review processes for resulting changes in funding or regulations
5. Make it very difficult to "decertify" or remove the bargaining entity (minimum 2 year stay, & petition of 50% providers)
These are some major points - the full text may be found in "The 2006 Ballot Questions" booklet with the red cover, or online at FCC providers need to understand the proposed law which is at the end of the booklet on pp. 12 & 13. The rest of the labor relations law (Chapter 150E) that this will be amended to is at
The Union SEIU is strongly backing this proposed legislation and they are collecting the necessary signature cards to become an exclusive representative. Many FCC providers are very concerned about this. The Department of Early Education and Care and some systems are against the proposed legislation. I will send several more e-mails about this critical issue. Please network with FCC providers and keep up to date about this.

So NO on question 3.
Anyone who wants to steal my opinions as their own, or debate 'em with me, feel free. As seen by question 1, I can be convinced by a good argument.
Something is very wrong with my email. It's confused. If I let it run all day, it might finish and sort itself out. I will discuss that with hoppie.

Oh I wanted to mention my source material. The book I'm reading is an artscroll portable class. The url is" and they will send you a week's demo if you want to see it for yourself, since obviously I'm providing a very short synopsis, even though it feels like each one goes on for days.
So a couple of verses, one from last week's parsha about Noah. And one from this week's parsha, also about Noah.

In the Mishnah/Gemorah sections we've covered the things that you can or can't do just prior to Shabbos lest you come to perform work. The followers of Shammai (who tends to be stricter) holds that you can't start projects like dying, or soaking wheat, things would cause your vessels to perform work on shabbos, even though you're not directly involved. Hillel's followers take the more permissive view that these things are okay because they are content to work silently in the background. Other things, such as cooking over coals, are more problematic because you might want to check the water levels and add more water, or stoke the coals, both of which would be prohibited. Answer, if you're a control-freak by nature, you might want to err on the side of Shammai, lest you be tempted.

We also covered actions permitted with non-Jews prior to Shabbos, such as, Shammai's buds say you can't help a non-Jew load his wagon, or sell him things immediately prior to Shabbos lest people think he's carrying the load for you, or transacting business for you. Hillel's peeps permit this. The law follows Hillel, which is nice because I'd hate to think I couldn't help a guy load up his van.

Today's question was: What other name is Noah's son Shem known by in the Bible?

So in the Halacha section, we've completed planting and plowing, which includes laws like not turning over soil, even unintentionally, by, for example, dragging a heavy object across the lawn. Dragging a light object across the lawn, for example, rolling a ball, is fine, because no one expects that to turn over anything, and if it gets caught on a tuft, for example, and pulls it out, it's likely to be pretty shallow, and not useful for planting. Tangentially we've discussed not watering your plants on Shabbos and sandboxes (okay if the sand is fine and not sticky. If you can make a sandcastle out of it, best not to play with it, lest you come to build.)

Today's answer: Melchizeldek. He meets up with Abraham.

Today's prayer insight was about justice. If G-d is a just ruler, why aren't we more frightened? King David used to declare daily his fear of G-d.
I want to say yesterday's talked about the three concepts of Shabbos, past, present, and future, and how the services relect that. But I might be lying. It's hard to remember this stuff. 8-)

And since it's not a Jewish holiday, I can go to Liz's today! Squee! But first, laundry!
Tags: electronics, government, religion

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.