Diversity

I don't watch much cable or over the air television. My viewing is generally limited to sporting events. Most recently I enjoyed several NCAA Tournament games. The student athletes are very impressive.

I deploy my "mute" button liberally, particularly during commercial breaks. I still see some of the offerings.

I find it both amusing and distressing how self-consciously multi- gender and multi-racial almost every commercial seems to be.

I have lived a long time. Generally speaking life looks nothing like these commercials.

https://www.verizon.com/home/verizonglobalhome/ghp_landing.aspx

Of course, all the cigarette commercials showing vibrant, athletic and beautiful people in my younger years did not reflect reality either. There was, however, no attempt at selling a social utopia that did not exist in order to keep the social justice warriors happy. Just a blatant attempt to persuade us that smoking was a habit of the cool and the beautiful. Commercial persuasion not social persuasion.

I think I prefer the former.

The Horror of Life in Trumpland

On April 15 Yahoo! treated us to yet another Trump inspired horror story about a young American tech entrepreneur and his Indian partners.

..."Now the company finds itself in limbo amid the Trump administration’s effort to kill an Obama-era regulation that sought to grant a limited stay in the U.S. to certain qualifying entrepreneurs, like Modon’s co-founders.

The regulation, known as the International Entrepreneur Rule, was first proposed in 2016 after multiple attempts to pass legislation that would create a so-called startup (sic) visa had failed in Congress." (Emphasis added)

So, the Obama administration, having failed to persuade the people's representatives of the value of their position did what it always did. Legislate by fiat.

For the left, usurping the power of Congress is not a problem if done by Democrats, but daring to undo such rule by fiat is a major transgression, assuming you are a Republican.

Glad to have the rules cleared up.

I love the language, "...Obama era regulation". Despite the fact that the author mentioned its 2016 provenance the phrasing suggests, at least to me, that the rule was in place for some time and had been acted upon by businesses which will now suffer unfairly from its undoing.

The regulation was issued three days before Mr. Trump's inauguration, so obviously, long standing policy on which major business decisions have rested. If you read far enough into the story you will find that the regulation had never been implemented, ever. Thus exactly no one could have relied upon it to their detriment.

How dare  President Trump undo an illegitimate rule that has never been actually relied upon or applied when to do so would cause such an upheaval in the business community!

Or something.