So does Clapton still agree with what he said? “My feeling about this hasn’t changed, really,” he insists. “Years later, when I played at the Mandela concert, one of the promoters said: ‘You know that this is your chance to apologise formally for what you said.’ And I thought: ‘You must be fucking joking.’ I was so insulted.”
~ Clapton, 2004 interview regarding a 1988 concert for Nelson Mandela
Oh.my.god. He was insulted? This literally made me say "oh my god" out loud. I didn't even know about all this growing up in the 80's and then listening to him later on in the 90's.
The original article this quote was taken from for Snopes continues:
This sound of heels being firmly dug in is typical Clapton. Though he is clearly not a racist, he is amazingly stubborn. The remark caused huge offence, but he still cannot bring himself to apologise.
I can understand why the guy who was addicted to coke could swing to being against any foreign substances that are injected.
He is a musician, not medically qualified in any way, and is easily duped by quack science. He also doesn't understand why laws are put in to prevent foreign interference with politics.
On multiple accounts we have seen millionaires and billionaires support each others un-scientific and inherently selfish ideas.
Clapton was always an idiot looking at his comments towards black people and support of nationalist. We somehow tolerated that and now, since Trump showed us even with the wildest comments and no political correctness, won’t affect your own popularity.
Stop tolerating that and start following scientist and professors instead of dumb musicians and celebrities.
One of the cornerstones of the religion they profess to follow is that followers will be beset by false prophets who try to lead the faithful into wickedness. It's the origin of the idiom "wolf in sheep's clothing". Followers of Jesus are then advised that they'll be able to tell who's who the same way you can tell that rotten fruit means a fig tree is blighted: you will know them by their fruits. In other words, if you listen to the warning and take even the slightest notice of what Jesus tells you is the right way to live, you won't be led astray by people who pretend to be spiritual authorities but preach things Jesus said are bad things for any human to do, such as proclaming their own righteousness, claiming to be more Godly than you, and openly seeking riches and power. Whether you believe in Christianity or not, what it comes down to is that these people are "following God" in a way they are, word for word, told not to. By God.
It's like if you tried to start up a Anarcho-Capitalist club and then immediately set up a hierarchical power structure and began extracting dues from the members to fund a project that disproportionately benefits the poorer members. It's like if you taught a class on healthy eating and then began extolling the benefits of swallowing batteries.
Performers at Disneyland theme park in Anaheim voted overwhelmingly in favor of unionizing in an election this week, the National Labor Relations Board announced Sunday. They will be members of the Actors’ Equity Association, the same union that represents performers and stage managers at Walt Disney World in Orlando, Florida.
The election at the theme park involved more than 1,700 employees in the character and parade departments. The vote count was 953 in favor of unionizing and 258 against it, according to a board spokesperson.
Actors’ Equity said in a statement that those workers had been an “exception” among the heavily unionized workforce at Disneyland “until now.”
I found this a bit confusing, but I think the core of this is really that Waffle House staff don’t get a choice on whether or not they buy a meal during their shift. Is that right?
I kind of got that gist from the article, but nothing super clear. It said that employees pay for the meal whether they eat it or not, which if you ordered food and didn’t eat it, that’s kinda on you. I think it should be saying that they are charged for the meal whether they ordered it or not, if that’s what is happening.
Basically, yes. They’re forcing you to purchase food, whether you want it, intend to consume it, or get to consume it.
And FWIW in the restaurant industry meal breaks are usually not a thing, so it is very common to order food and just have to scarf it down whenever you’re not using your hands or in front of guests. I used to unwrap, consume, and dispose of the packaging for a sandwich in the time it took me to walk from the door to dry storage.
Edit: also IIRC wage deductions are usually illegal unless for uniforms or ordered by a court. This is probably an easy case.
If you’re not eating hour old food above a trash can after mistiming making a meal what even are you doing (I don’t cook professionally, was married to a chef/baker and got to hear all about the nonsense)
It’s important to keep this in mind whenever retailers decry shoplifters as a source of price increases - the retailers steal more from their employees paychecks than what is stolen from them (and most shrinkage isn’t due to theft anyways).
It’s also important to keep this in mind whenever asshats like Bezos or Musk talk about eliminating the NLRB.
Depends on the theft. I won’t rat out someone stealing food or baby formula. But I would for sure rat out those group-assaults on premium brands. They smash and break shit unnecessarily and leave chaos for the workers when they’re gone.
You’d think so… but our two tier justice system just let Trump cut his bail requirement in a third because “it so hawwwd”. Never underestimate how stuffed with corporate toadies our justice system is.
There’s a right wing seminar of economics that they invite and “educate” supreme Court justices on how economics works. Well their ideology of economics anyway. Don’t recall if it was a one time thing back then or ongoing but holy cow.
You don’t even need something so explicit - justices regularly rub elbows with billionaires and are pretty clearly influenced by the association.
We need something like Discworld’s unseen university where they can just be academics locked away from public discourse and celebrity - being a Supreme Court Justice should be an obscure dead-end of a job that only appeals to the legally obsessed.
We need a critical mass boycott that has actual change. Lots are prepping to boycott all Kellogg’s products starting April 1 (giving time to prep, but not bulk buy) for 3 months.
Hopefully this kinda shit actually starts to make a real dent. Causing actual crash, or actual positive change.
Every person that votes against companies with their wallets makes a dent. I think the economy is helping by making more people HAVE to start making some tough spending decisions. Companies are pretty stupid to not be considering that as they continue to try to fuck people over more each day.
I’m not entirely convinced. The bud light bullshit was MASSIVE and their stock only took a tiny hit, and that was a right wing thing which means the participation percentage was massive.
How was the bud light thing massive? People were buying Bud just to pour it out and then just buying other products in Inbev’s portfolio. People don’t understand that 85% of the beer in most liquor stores is a split between Coors and Inbev portfolios.
I’ve found most people are more talk than action. I am almost to the point of having to create my own supply chain as my boycott list continues to grow over the years lol
I agree on Stouffer’s, but I knew about that one as I live in the same region as the original US factory for them. However, I stick with whatever knock-off brand looks best these days. Yes, being intimately familiar with the finickiness of cats, that is the only option.
That’s pretty fucked up. I would add them to the list of companies that I will no longer patronize, but they there were already there for being gross in other ways.
huffpost.com
Hot