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.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Tuesday, March 3. 2015
Wesleyan: With so many marginalized groups on campus, one wonders who is left to do the discriminating and oppressing.
Are there no normal, balanced, wholesome, smart white males there who play sports, dig cute chicks, and like beer? They can be assigned the oppressor job.
Where in the US can you buy alcohol in grocery stores?
Jobs Data Don’t Prove College Is Worth the Cost
The Pathetic Man-Boys of Lena Dunham’s Girls - Mark Judge at Acculturated pinpoints the popular HBO show's fatal flaw.
WHY DO WOMEN PREFER TO DATE MEN WITH TWICE THEIR INCOME?
Why do men find billionaire heiresses attractive?
Should Athletes Eat Fat or Carbs?
Want to Sell Your House? Don’t Do These 4 Things
Don't Defund, Just Dismantle the Department of Homeland Security
Upset about inequality? How about thanking Fred Smith instead
Related: Breaking Bad (Debt)
Man, do I agree with that. When do government fixes ever work?
Hillary Clinton Used Personal Email at State Dept., Possibly Breaking Rules
Turmoil at Clinton Foundation
Douthat: Hillary and the Machine
Seven Reasons Why Marco Rubio Should Not Run for President - Stay in the Senate, Marco, your country needs you
Erickson: My Candid Candidate Thoughts After CPAC
Zimbabwe’s Mugabe condemns ‘white’ safaris, eats baby elephant at birthday bash
Despite Russian Warnings, US Will Deploy A Battalion To Ukraine By The End Of The Week
Insane. I see no compelling national interest there.
THE PLOT TO FREE NORTH KOREA WITH SMUGGLED EPISODES OF ‘FRIENDS
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
I agree - dismantle the DHS. Much of it should just be scrapped. The rest reorganized into something that doesn't resemble the internal enforcement arm of a totalitarian state.
I also agree. But if you try to dismantle DHS and they say "No" then you find out that we don't just "resemble" a Totalitarian State. We are one.
Notice you don't hear many people say "It's a free country" much anymore?
Yes I have noticed - and I have consciously stopped saying it.
We have found out who is doing all the oppressing at Weslyan. It's some guy named "Bob"
You mean drinkin' alcohol? You can buy government-poisoned alcohol in most grocery stores.
Or putter around the spice rack, vanilla extract is 70 proof, while 30-50 proof vitamin tonics abound.
Imagine the future map of who can sell marijuana where will look the same. Local option was one of the keys to ending Prohibition.
Why do women prefer to date men with twice their income?
Because they're incapable of idealizing a relationship. Men idealize women. Women objectify the temporal effects of an association with a man.
This immediately devolves into the usual deconstructionism about the soullessness of Darwinian conditioning about survival, blah, blah, blah, but the fact is that as a subculture, the rules are different for women. There really are none.
Reciprocity. Men like to date women half their age.
Except if taken as an absolute, Reynolds is wrong. Even taken as an adage, neither sexist formulation is justified by the other.
Technically, neither are true as absolutes, but my experience is as I expressed it. And I find women half my age trivial and dimensionless, leaving me to idealize certain members of the cohort my own age, apparently a unilateral phenomenon.
Maybe the women don't enjoy being idealized? Does that matter?
Without idealization, relationships between the sexes are doomed. Like I said, women don't seem to mind. Maybe it's their new federal sugar daddies.
Men prefer to date/marry women who they are interested in. Coincidently women prefer to date/marry men that they are interested in. Where is the problem? If this weren't true there would be no romantic novels, no Shakespeare, no Dear Abby and no really good reason to be alive.
Pedantry and sermons I've come to expect, GWTW, so perhaps you've run out of space in the comment field, somehow.
I answered your question with my first remark. As often as not, that's the problem.
My "question" was rhetorical. A rhetorical question requires no answer because the answer is obvious. But yet you felt the need to respond in a negative manner anyway. Are you still butt hurt about past discussions?
Yes, dismantle the DHS but not before we use them effectively to actually improve homeland security. Use the 60,000 DHS employees in the field to find and deport illegal aliens; the good the bad and the ugly. No long drawn out hearings and useless court appearances, find them deport them within 24 hours. Drop 500 or so DHS employees into San Francisco and send two at a time to every restuarant in town to check Id's and arrest illegals. Have a second team driving busses to take the illegals either to the Southern border or to a flight totheir home country. Send them home. No hearing, no whining, no exceptions.
re "..dismantle the DHS but not before we use them effectively to actually improve homeland security."
If I may take the liberty of disagreeing with you GWTW, I would argue that the Gov't. is doing the best they can now without stealing more of our freedom, and the effort is intolerable.
We have now seen the outcome. As NJ Soldier alludes, it is becoming the internal enforcement arm of the State. It was going to happen sooner or later as men like 0bama come to power and wield the levers of power for their own benefit.
It would be best to dismantle it all ASAP, but that's not going to happen. Bureaucracy is never eliminated and once established it grows non-stop.
Where will it all end? I dunno, but I suspect it will get much worse before it gets better.
Rather than keeping DHS just offer a ten thousand a head reward for turning them in and then ship them to the border on a freight train. Any returnees get 5 years hard labor building "the fence". Anyone hiring illegals gets a ten thousand dollar fine and a year building "the fence".
The law of unintended consequences. In the past
when a bounty was put on a pests head such as rats, rabbits (Australia) whatever, it opened up the door to grift and people breeding the pests.
>> anyone hiring illegals...
i guess we need to get rid of that federal incentive subsidy in hiring illegals first then.
while we're at it get rid of all the career parasites In the swamp.
Absolutely go after the employers. Perhaps a $1000 a day fine for each illegal. Go after anyone who "harbors" them to include landlords, again a hefty fine would take the joy out of the co-conspirators. For foriegn workers brought there legally to take American jobs a simple charge levied along with the SS payment to cover the costs to taxpayers. I would suggest $10 an hour to start with and adjust as more data is acquired. This should apply to H1B employees too. It would make sense to require that hospitals determine the status of people using their services and that they would be reimbursed once all the apporpriate information is provided. Then charge the country of origin for the costs incurred treating their citizens. Of course deport them as well perhaps a quick response team sent to the hospital to pick up the illegal and any family members. Finally bring a case before the Supremes to finally set the record straight on th 14th amendment. It was never intended to allow and encourage law breakers to birth their chidren into citizenship and a lifetime of welfare.
The payoffs to the Clinton foundation while HRC held public office have been unconstitutional. ie, against the law, that is illegal.
The U.S. Constitution Actually Bans Hillary’s Foreign Government Payola
"No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State."
What will be done about it? Nothing of course. Our ruling masters are above the law, particularly the Clintons.
Hillary "possibly" broke the rules. Knowing just a bit about the regulations governing classified communications, I am pretty sure that storing and sending such communications across private channels is criminal, if I recall correctly.
Very, very criminal. But the law never does seem to apply to the Clintons.
But let a Republican take a drink of water , or have "binders
full of women" or carry his "dog on the roof"in a special carrier
(which is a dogs dream) and you have the basis for a federal
case and a non-stop MSM media outrage.
Now prepare yourselves for Hillary's "missing e-mails".
#Ready for Hillary?