Wal-Mart announced yesterday that it would be backing Obamacare. Why, you might ask, is Wal-Mart doing this when almost every other business interest is against it? The bottom line is your answer.
Obama's plan calls for a mandate that businesses either offer health benefits to their employees or pay into the public plan. Wal-Mart stated yesterday in a letter to Congress that they will back this plan as long as the mandate is based on a profit per employee basis, and not a per employee basis. Wal-Mart is the largest employer in the US. Having that many employees drives the per employee profit way down.
In case you didn't know, I work for Wal-Mart. I have worked there going on thirteen years. Among my friends and family, a lot of whom lean or have fallen over to the left, I have been Wal-Mart's greatest defender. After all, who among us has taken better advantage of our free market society?
A few months ago, I remember hearing Rush Limbaugh quote from a book about Wal-Mart. The author had set out to really get them. They were evil and he was going to show the world. For research sake, he applied for a job there. Once he was in, he changed his tune. When he got involved in the culture, when he found out that department managers there were running their own little businesses inside of a Wal-Mart building (the Wal-Mart lingo for that is "Store Within A Store" or SWAS) he could not say enough good things about them and the book he intended to write never materialized, while a pro-WM book did.
Lately, though, Wal-Mart has changed. Gone are the days of SWAS. Department managers at store level used to be able to say, "This is a good item for my department/community. I think I'll order a couple of hundred of them and promote the heck out of it!" Now, just like our government, WM has centralized all of its power at its corporate office. Your local Wal-Mart is no longer allowed to order in items that it thinks will sell well in your community. That is all dictated by Bentonville now.
I recently commented on this to a co-worker. "Every day," I said. "Wal-Mart is becoming more like Washington." We both laughed a little, then sighed because we knew it was true. Strong central office, strong central government.
Now we have WM backing the most liberal president ever and his ridiculous attempt at nationalizing health care. Wal-Mart's reason behind this is quite devious, however. Wal-Mart is looking at the public option. When O gets his way, and we have his precious public option, many of WM's employees will opt out of their paid plans and go on the government dole. When they do this, costs for providing health benefits for its employees will plummet, even after they pay their profit-per-employee based fee to the government. Basically, every other business in the country will be paying the tab for WM's employees. Since the public option will most likely be means-based, many of Wal-mat's lower paid employees will qualify.
Mr. Sam, as the long-timers at Wal-Mart call him, is turning in his grave!

In Mason, Ohio, a couple of moonbats have taken the war on Christmas to a whole new level.



It's no wonder they want to take Jesus out of nativity scenes, because look who they want to put in:




Now tell me they don't think he's "The Messiah".

Edit: Right Wing News also has a war on christmas story here.

Moonbattery put up a post about how the Libs in Connecticut have recently banned the sale of novelty lighters.

The ordinance will take effect Dec. 17. The fire marshal and city police officers will enforce the local law, which includes $100 fine for the “retail sale, offer of retail sale, gift or distribution of any novelty lighter within the territorial jurisdiction of the City of New London.”

Massachusetts senator Chris Dodd agrees with the ban. He has congratulated the town of New London. In July, he sponsored federal legislation for the ban.

In July, U.S. Sen. Christopher J. Dodd introduced legislation with two other senators to ban novelty lighters nationwide. In a statement at the time, Dodd said, “While they may appear to be harmless toys, novelty lighters can be incredibly dangerous to young children.” Dodd plans to reintroduce the legislation in January.

You have probably seen a novelty lighter before, though you might not have known it. Displayed in the checkout lane at your local convenience store or at a gas station with the racks of sunglasses and key chains, you may not recognize them if you saw them, because they look like small toys. And it’s due to this misleading appearance that they pose such a threat to our kids, and should be pulled off the market.

Novelty lighters can look like almost anything but a fire-starting device. They appear in the form of small cars or motorcycles. They can be musical instruments, tiny rubber animals, shoes, cell phones, or even fire hydrants. They come with sound affects, flashing lights, and may even play music.

Thank you, Senator Whitmer. Thank you for telling me what a novelty lighter is. I was really too stupid to figure that one out for myself. At least I'm not the one too stupid to use the word effects properly.

But while these novelty lighters are still for sale and can easily fall into the wrong hands, they will continue to undermine our efforts as adults to keep our kids out of harm’s way. It’s time that we put a stop to selling dangerous and deceptive toy-like lighters.

And while we keep electing these nanny staters, our government can easily fall into the wrong hands. They will continue to undermine our rights as adults. It's time that we put a stop to electing these deceptive, toy-like leaders.

I was watching the local news with my wife, when an innocent enough story comes on about Frosty the Snowman coming to visit a Big Brothers and Big Sisters holiday party. I begin to smirk a little at the story, but say nothing.

My wife, however, who has great empathy, said, "Don't you think that the kids would have rather had Santa Claus show up?"

I replied, "They can't do Santa, honey, you should know that."

"Why not?!?"

"Because Santa is part of Christmas." I tell her.

"Well, Frosty's part of Christmas, isn't he"

"We-e-e-ll," I say. "You see, the thing is, Frosty is more related to winter than to Christmas. They can use Frosty more safely than Santa. Frosty is less likely to offend."

"You see, Frosty is not a legend handed down generation after generation about a Christian saint who actually made a difference in the world."

"Well, that's not fair," she said. "I'm willing to bet that even the non-christian kids would have rather had Santa Claus than Frosty the Snowman

"That's not all," I tell her. "The University of North Carolina has anned Christmas trees from anywhere on their campus."

"Won't that offend the Christians there?"

I just may make a conservative of her yet.