Hysterical Headlines (Funny or Absurd) for March 1st
Bottom Line: These are the daily doses of nonsense in the media and my hot takes on them...
Daring Florida to oust them, city commissioners pursue their own ban on assault rifles - Miami Herald
Excerpt: Coral Gables city commissioners said Tuesday they would risk ouster from office and thousands of dollars in fines and legal costs by pursuing a local ban on assault rifles that Florida law prohibits them from enacting. The proposed Coral Gables ban on military-style rifles passed unanimously over the objections of the city attorney, who warned commissioners that Florida law prohibits her from defending them from any litigation tied to a local gun rule.
Hot Take: Two thoughts immediately come to mind. The first pertains to engagement and turnout in local elections. Historically only an average of about 18% turnout for municipal only elections while about 60% turnout for Presidential elections (with other combinations of elections being somewhere in between). The irony, as I've long pointed out, is that commonly the government that is closest to you geographically (starting with your HOA if you have one), is the one that's most likely to impact your day-to-day life. Sure enough, quick research shows that over the past couple of election cycles, in which these Coral Gables politicians were elected, turnout has been 26% on the high side to 16% on the low side. This leads to the next point. Only one in five adults turn out to vote to elect local public officials who don't believe that the law applies to them. That's scary and leads to the next point...
Forget the issue for a moment and ponder this one. What happens to our state and the country if local governments no longer care about the rule of law and our constitutional rights? I've been warning about future threats to liberties and the potential that the country morphs into a banana republic for years because of issues - different but similar to this one. Most commonly illegal immigration and the declared "sanctuary" status of certain local governments that have refused to cooperate with federal authorities thus breaking the law while obstructing justice. In those instances, I've asserted that all local officials proven to obstruct justice should be arrested and held to justice under the law. Part of my assertion has been that if local governments can obstruct justice and get away with it, why wouldn't they break other laws as they see fit? So here we are. I sincerely hope that Coral Gables doesn't deliberately break the law by seeing this through but if they do - everyone responsible for the decision absolutely should be held accountable under the law. All the rest of us tax paying types, that these people are supposed to be working for, are held accountable.
NFL splits with Papa John's, makes Pizza Hut new sponsor - Sun Sentinel
Hot Take: It's stunning just how far those in media with agendas will go to perpetuate biased characterizations. Better still this was in the "Business" section. Heads up - if you're relying on news like this story suggests you're screwed. Why? Let's take this in two quick pieces.
First: NFL splits with Papa John's... If this alone were the headline it'd be accurate. In the context of the rest of the headline it has the connotation that the NFL dumped Papa John's because...
Second: makes Pizza Hut new sponsor... Umm business reporting specialists... Heads up. Here's the way it works. The NFL doesn't go around trying to find their favorite company to "make" sponsors out of... There are category exclusive opportunities and whatever company in good standing that pays the most gets it. That's how this works but I guess not if you're attempting to espouse an agenda in the first place right? In terms of what actually happened with Papa Johns... They were five years into and eight year contract with the NFL that contained an mutual out clause (meaning that both parties had to agree to exit to end the contract without legal action). There was bad blood between the two entities stemming from the founder and then CEO - "Papa John" - that sales were being hurt because of the NFL's decision to let players protest the anthem. Now that the season has passed and with Papa John's sales having to continued to slump through the rest of the season they were ready to be done with the deal just as the NFL was ready to move on - so it was completely mutual because it had to be. And here's the thing. John was right from a business perspective independent of social considerations. The NFL ratings suffered considerably last year and now 20% of all NFL viewers from two years ago no longer watches games. That's huge and it's bound to hurt a business relying on reaching those customers.
But hey, that's actually business information and we wouldn't want that to enter the mix in the business section now would we?
Until tomorrow...
Hot Take: Just in case you're still wondering if the Cuban government is still evil...