Hillary's Not the Candidate of Change . . . or Even 'Keep the Change'
Hillary Clinton told us, "Everyday Americans need a champion." Apparently that champion doesn't need to leave tips. One of the great political mysteries of the early 2016 presidential campaign has been solved: Hillary Clinton did not leave a tip at the Chipotle restaurant she visited during her road trip to Iowa on Sunday. "Her bill was $20 and some change, and they paid with $21 and left" without putting anything in a tip jar on the counter, Charles Wright, the manager at the Maumee, Ohio, Chipotle restaurant told Bloomberg. Wearing large sunglasses, Clinton wasn't recognized by any of the workers at the fast-food Mexican chain when she and Huma Abedin, the vice chairwoman of her presidential campaign, ordered a chicken burrito bowl, a chicken salad, a blackberry Izzy, and a soda. Perspective: She didn't even leave the change in the tip jar. I'll put that in, if for no other reason than the fact that I have a pocket full of nickels and pennies at the end of the day . . . and if I end up coming back, I don't want the wait staff spitting in my food. Hillary defenders will instantly declare this to be an overhyped "Tip Gate" and insist that she's being judged on unfair criteria, blah blah blah. Listen. The combined net worth of the Clintons is "anywhere from $100 to $200 million." She can afford to tip, and she chooses to not leave a tip. Right then and there, she's got the opportunity to help out the people behind the counter at Chipotle, and she chose not to. We're supposed to elect her because she's going to be the "champion" of "everyday Americans," but she decided she needs those coins, totaling less than a dollar, more than the staff does. 
We found the one circumstance in which Hillary Clinton wants to limit spending. Hillary Clinton, speaking to an audience at the Clinton Global Initiative in September 2012: "There are rich people everywhere, and yet they do not contribute to the growth of their own countries." No shinola, Madam Secretary. And now, the alternative perspective from a man I respect a great deal, ExJon: Despite the low-rent behavior of this elderly multimillionaire and her live-in nurse, it's time we had a national conversation on gratuities. Though I'm an impoverished soul who lives off bulk ramen and stolen ketchup packets, had I más dinero en el banco, I still wouldn't tip at Chipotle or other fast-food restaurants. When I'm at a restaurant with tableside service I leave 20%, varying by about five percent for exceptionally good or bad service. But when I have to slog up to a counter, give my order, correct my order, pay the creatively pierced mouthbreather, then pick up my own food — whom exactly am I tipping? I'll usually tip the help at my local hipster coffeehouse, but part of that is an investment for preferential treatment on my next visit. At sketchier joints I might showily toss in a buck so the help doesn't add any special ingredients. (Always be kind to the ex-con preparing your food, kids.) But why should I pay above and beyond for service when I'm the guy providing the service? Two points, ExJon. First, you're not running for president as the big-hearted, generous crusader for the common people against the miserly one percent the way Hillary is. Secondly, a long while back, you forgot to tip Trivago Guy, and he's been stalking you ever since: 
"I'll select your lodging . . ." Apparently some lefties have picked up the habit of leaving little pre-printed screeds against the practice of tipping, declaring that "I do not leave tips anywhere because the law governing tipping causes pay inequality" and the practice "encourages both customers and servers to stereotype and discriminate." 
Let me tell you something you don't want to hear, anti-tip lefties: You're cheap. You like your money, and you don't like giving up any more of your money than you absolutely must to get your burrito or meal or whatever good or service you just purchased. You can dress up your selfishness and tightfistedness in as many social-justice slogans as you like, the same way you dress up your burrito with toppings, but you're not fooling anyone. You're greedy. You want money, and you're not willing to part with another 15 or 20 percent of the agreed price the way everyone else does, because you don't care enough about the guy or gal who just served you. You aren't really that compassionate. You aren't really that appreciative of people who work hard. None of the servers who served you see your little note and nod appreciatively at your principled stand. They swear under their breath. You're worse than the non-tippers who you would call tightwads. Because the ordinary tightwads aren't arrogant and selfish enough to claim that they're doing the wait staff a favor. 'Compassionate Conservatism' Is Coming Back This is smart politics on the part of Jeb Bush -- emphasizing the compassionate focus on special-needs children, and emphasizing the option of vouchers and school choice for conservatives who want to see greater parental choice in education. Likely Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush on Thursday will attend [Mississippi] Gov. Phil Bryant's bill-signing ceremony for the Equal Opportunity for Students with Special Needs Act passed by the Legislature this year. Bush's Foundation for Excellence in Education supported the measure, which provides vouchers for parents of children with special needs to spend $6,500 a year in public money on private schools and services. The pilot program will cover 500 students the first year, then add 500 a year until it reaches the five-year mark, at which point it would have to be reauthorized by the Legislature. Mississippi has more than 66,000 public school students with disabilities, and ranks last in the nation for their graduation rate, at 22.5 percent. While governor of Florida, Bush helped create a similar program, the first of its kind in the U.S. It started as a pilot project as well, but now more than 28,000 Florida special-needs children attend private schools using scholarships. The Export-Import Bank, an Obscure but Useful Litmus-Test Issue Look, if you're not willing to ditch "unseemly, inefficient, and irrelevant" "corporate welfare" "in the business of subsidizing private companies with taxpayer dollars" . . . then you're not serious about cutting government spending. The Export-Import Bank is the sort of thing that liberals and progressive Democrats would oppose if they believed their anti-corporate rhetoric, and it's the sort of thing any free-market, as opposed to pro-big-business, Republican should oppose. "Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce, a free-market nonprofit organization, today released a new web ad contrasting Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's longtime support for the Export-Import Bank with free-market champions willing to stand up against it. The new ad asks lawmakers who they stand with and urges Congress to allow the bank to expire." 
The ad also notes that a number Republican presidential candidates and free-market advocates — including Senators Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, and Marco Rubio, House Ways and Means Committee chairman Paul Ryan, Wisconsin governor Scott Walker, and former Florida governor Jeb Bush — have announced that they would like to see the bank end. House Speaker John Boehner and Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell are in the position to allow the bank to expire on June 30th -- by doing nothing. For once, inertia is on our side! ADDENDA: Democratic representative John Lewis, writing about Apple's Tim Cook as one of the 100 most influential people in the world: "Tim is unwavering in his support of an individual's right to privacy and is not only embracing equality and LGBT rights but advocating for change through his words and actions." Sure, sure, let's not look too closely at Apple's work in Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Iran, where official government policies include jailing and murdering gays and lesbians. | 
Comments
Post a Comment