We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Now he’s won. The old Obama is back. He must not be underestimated. He has deftly leveraged his class-war-themed election victory (a) to secure a source of funding (albeit still small) for the bloated welfare state, (b) to carry out an admirably candid bit of income redistribution, and (c) to fracture the one remaining institutional obstacle to the rest of his ideological agenda.
Angie's List: I'm not a fan, after having poor results from their preferred vendors. As far as I can tell, the two I used, a large telcom provider and a local garage door company, use the list to bolster their lousy consumer ratings. The garage door people would not return my calls, because I was too far away (10 miles)! When I had a complaint about double-billing (I couldn't stop it for six months) from the phone company, AL refused to process my complaint without detail on every communication I had had with the company, making it almost impossible to provide helpful criticism. The kicker is trying to get them to leave you alone; the e-mails were easily stopped, but the snail mail still arrives every few weeks. Just my $0.02.
I'm glad you've had a good experience with Angie's List.
As a service provider, I find it to be an extortion racket. I'm not a member, so when a person complains about my performance on Angie's List, they want to charge me for gaining the ability to address the complaint on the site.
I noticed this when the "Rifles vs. [Whatever]" comparisons started. I always seems to be "rifles" with pistols/handguns excluded from the comparison. Seems to me to be a dubious argument under those restrictions. At the very least it would seem that an honest comparison would include all guns.
In addition a commenter at the Breitbart link points out:
"This whole argument is a logical fallacy. False equivalence. Hammers AND clubs makes that a HUGE catagory of weapons rifles a very thin catagory of guns. It is like saying Ford Fiestas are green far less often than all trucks of any kind.
Sorry you were so easily fooled by such a silly argument. People believe what they want anyways, but logically this argument would never would up in an actual moderated debate, hate to break it to you but if you agree or "liked" this blog, then you are buying into pro gun rhetoric.
Let's put it this way, if you give everyone a rifle the same as basically everyone has a hammer I bet those numbers would be much different. "
In fact it is the scary black rifles with thingys on them that should be looked at. The leftys want to outlaw those rifles and have conveniently decided to call them all "assault rifles" to help there case. Personally I think they should have stuck with "scary black rifles with thingys on them". Not as appealing to the uninformed but more honest.
Using the CRA's dsparate impact theory (already ruled unconstitutional in Ricci in the employment context), Holder's torching of 3,000 bankers goes beyond Pigford. From 1992 to 2006, it was the but for cause of the destruction of traditional color blind credit rating standards, without which our economic meltdown of 2007 - and from which we still suffer - would not have occurred. I wish this was just Pigford II, but its ripples go far beyond just another govt. racial give away. It truly is a cancer.