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, August 25. 2015
Food fetishists: Orthorexia
This is correct: China stock market panic shows what happens when stimulants wear off
Same in the US, altho China is more obvious about its attempts to control markets. In the US, ZIRP and QE were errors in the beginning, and led to a bubble stock market which needs a meaningful correction, a high colonic enema. Central banks distort markets, distort reality.
That's why Summers is wrong: The Fed looks set to make a dangerous mistake
Rates should have inched up years ago
The Long Rise of the Secular Faith - The threat to religious liberty has its roots in a progressivist faith that has been steadily gaining momentum in America for at least a century and a half.
Is it time to regulate personal trainers?
Good grief. Let's regulate everybody and every thing. Zero freedom.
Times Square is packed because people like to go see the spectacle — topless ladies, Elmos, and all.
It's a circus
Crazy Like a Visionary - Elon Musk’s remarkable career reminds us that individuals matter.
Is it time to regulate personal trainers?
Congressmen Push for Food Freedom, Drink Unregulated Raw Milk
Atheists Warn Football Coaches and Chaplains Not to ´Instill Christianity in Vulnerable Young Men´
The education mess is a lot like the health care mess
University of Maryland scholar: Ban the ‘Southern belle’
Boys being sophomorically-incorrect
Democrat Utopia Is Coming to a City Near You
Dem Rep.: Scott Walker ‘Tightening the Noose, Literally, Around African-Americans’
White House Throws Hillary Under the Bus=> Says Picking Biden Was Obama’s Best Decision Ever
An ominous precedent for Hillary Clinton
Obama Gets Low Marks for His Handling of Iran
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
No one wants the bulldozed empty lot where a Post Office once stood to be named after them
Yup. Civilized people become attached to the empty shells of their civilization, which is why barbarians exist: to do the jobs civilized people ought to do, but can't bring themselves to do.
Blasphemy laws are ridiculous, outdated, historical anachronisms
Nope. People cannot live with hierarchy, defined in law, identifiable in ordinary life by skin color, speech (that is permitted words), and dress (among other means).
The only questions before each society are who will be privileged and what can be said about the privileged (and their ideas). And every society will have those rules codified in law and regulation and enforced by social conformity.
And I despise the ones our society has chosen.
damn, that was nearly completely incoherent.
you mean I can't say little barry is incompetent and his family dresses like walmart refugees? or that all islams are goat f'ers and baby rapists?
what or who can I not trash?
unless ... is this more conservative victimization?
You should stop trying to be clever, you don't have it in you.
upchuck? is that you?
see, I can offend anyone, even the thickest privileged morons on the forum.
so you too can stop playing offended victim.
I think you miss the point. But no matter, you're smart.
‘Tightening the Noose, Literally, Around African-Americans’
Democrats are correct: America is hopelessly racist country that will never be fair to blacks. I encourage all blacks to abandon their property, renounce their citizenship, and to flee to their ancestral homelands.
But there are more homeless people here than there are in Gambia
Dogu Gnahore, a diplomat from the Ivory Coast
Does anyone believe this?
Any comments from these "honorable" diplomats on the difference in numbers between subjects in their homelands murdered by tyrants and the number of people De Blasio has had executed?
The Ivory Coast was invaded and conquered by France in 2011 and is currently ruled by puppet government of Paris.
I'd counter with what percentage of his country's residents live on land to which they hold no title, or even lease.
Captive preaching is a problem. People are there to play the game and not be pressured by the coach to listen to his particular religious preferences (can be very annoying if the coach's religion is not the same as yours).
Religion needs to be voluntary.
doesn't bother me at all. NASCAR manages an "invocation" prior to its races and I think they invoke the confederate gods as well. besides, most protestant style prayers are innocuous feel good wishes anyway, one size fitteth all.
What is with this peculiar obsession with the "Southern Belle" and hoop skirts? Is this a parody?
BTW, I hope everyone realizes that over the last 60+ years, millions of Northerners moved to the South with the advent of A/C and the Interstate Highway System and the demise of the old RustBucket. In some states, of the old Confederacy, barely half the population traces back to before the Civil War.
Hey, I'm just glad the mini skirt wasn't in fashion on the eve of the Civil War. Hoop skirts being banned because people saw Scarlet wear them in a movie is one thing, but mini skirts, as a man, I say, hell no.
>Food fetishists: Orthorexia
It's the new religion. Filling the void.
And the problem isn't that these people are ok with their own food choices, they think they can dictate everyone's. And for goodness sakes, don't listen to the government's nutritional brilliance.
>Shark jumps out of water chasing seal off Cape Cod
Not caused by global warming?
>University of Maryland scholar: Ban the ‘Southern belle’
Absolutely. Because all college girls should be twerking in cut off shorts instead. Or even better unshaven, tattooed and wearing men's clothing instead to 'speak out against the patriarchy'.
How about we ban "scholars" instead?
I would ban tattoos, especially on women. But that's just me. Why people choose to deface their bodies with graffiti is beyond me, but I find it singularly unattractive.
Rubbish. How is Maggie's constant declarations about food and recipes, and BD's incessant food and lifestyle preening not fetishizing and violating your precious right to be free from speech?
You know how intolerant you'd be of it if a leftist did it and I don't see any of them around here expecting you to convert to veganism.
>Rubbish. How is Maggie's constant declarations about food and recipes, and BD's incessant food and lifestyle preening not fetishizing and violating your precious right to be free from speech?
Because it's called sharing information on common interests and hobbies and having an opinion, not proselytizing.
Sorry you can't tell the difference.
You're projecting. You have precisely zero evidence I can't tell the difference, not that I need to defend against your little strawman.
Rightists who unwisely but proudly conflate their apparently un-thought lifestyle quirks with normalcy run afoul of the same rule against downcrying opposing belief they'd never permit the left to use when it lambastes, for example, your religion. And there is no right to be free from thought as we well know.
If that's true, then thin-skinned protests against, as you put it, proselytizing, are akin to shrieking that you do indeed have the right to be free from hearing opposing speech. But like I say, I don't see the left's vegans coming in here and interrupting your claimed right to share your narrow sacred interests in peace and quiet.
What's oddest, however, is that part of your shared interest is defending the above unconscious belief. Yet rightist traditionalism has little to do with what are assumed, merely ostensible views on your common and probably ancestral diet and its associated lifestyles. The right's roots are in conservation, and further back, in Christian grace and compassion, both being value sets that have just about nothing to do with today's western, epicurean, commercialized and industrialized, even hedonistic meat diet, and hence, the rightist obsession with it.
Then consider that animal agriculture is cruel, unusual, scientifically and nutritionally unnecessary, ahistoric, vastly wasteful, deeply unhealthy, and, as I mentioned, largely unconscious as a faith when it's from the same brigade who apparently sees it as some quasi-intellectual "shared interest" holdout for their tribalism after its equally ostensible politics lost virtually all trace of real structural conservativism over the last hundred years.
In other words, it's indefensible and it's dumb. But nice strawman. I well know the difference, if that matters.
Elton Musk may be many things but a "visionary" isn't one of them. Visionaries start businesses, Musk buys them. He is a past master at milking taxpayers money so he can look successful. Tesla Motors isn't a car company at all but just another rent seeker which has successfully received $2.5 billion dollars of tax payers money to keep the doors open. Tesla looses between $4 and $14 thousand dollars on every car they sell, hardly a successful business. He'll probably go into wind next as there seems to be no end of government money to blow away there.,
Actually, Musk has been pretty vocal about getting rid of the subsidies he receives.
Here is some myth-making at work:
It is a myth to think that in receiving government benefits, one 'believes' in them. Musk, much like the Koch Brothers, does accept subsidies because they are available. Both the Kochs and Musk argue they'd still be doing business without the subsidies. Both argue they take the subsidies because - why not? I agree.
Here's why. If the subsidies exist to support failing businesses, but not real entrepreneurs and businessmen seeking to earn profits, then it does not benefit the entrepreneurs and businessmen to let their competition accept the subsidies while they do not. Subsidies essentially keep failing and inefficient businesses afloat, to the detriment of healthy ones.
Musk's Tesla, even without subsidies, would lose money - but is rather healthy overall due to Musk's own cash and support he provides as an entrepreneur.
Furthermore, Tesla is not a car company. It's a battery company that has come to life as a car company. It may, eventually, produce more profitable electric cars. However, the primary goal of Tesla now is to use its unique battery systems to power homes with alternatively generated stored electricity.
Musk can afford to lose money, even without subsidies.
Whether Musk is a visionary or not - that's something I'll let others argue over. I happen to think he's just an entrepreneur who has stumbled into some unique niches. He probably hires a few visionaries who don't have the capacity to make their visions reality.
But it's very wrong to assume Musk is just another subsidy-addicted business person. His opinions and commentaries on government intervention in business are well-known and you know he must be pretty vocal about it when Mother Jones is calling him out.
I would add that if you own a business in an industry that is subsidized, not taking the subsidy is akin to playing Monopoly where everyone but you collects $200 when passing GO. The subsidy money is built into the system and not taking it can result in a severe competitive disadvantage.
His opinions hardly matter if his actions contradict his words. He doesn't have a viable business without the subsidies the taxpayers are forced to give him. I imagine his batteries get even more subsidies than the cars do.
Actually politics may be his next venture since just like all politicians his actions don't match his rhetoric.
Congressmen Push for Food Freedom, Drink Unregulated Raw Milk
Feds won't drop the reins of control on anything.
I was following this local matter of the relentless pursuit of an retired farmer who was making soft cheese out of unpasteurized milk he got from his neighbor and selling it. The regulator's problem was that he was not pasteurizing it first.
He wasn't pasteurizing it first because the actual process of cheese-making calls for cooking the cheese longer at a higher temp than flash pasteurization done by the machine that she insisted that he buy.
And so she shifted to that his sanitizing wasn't sufficient, that washing his cookware with hot water wasn't sufficient and he was contaminating his equipment WITH HOT WATER. No actual lab results that showed his bacteria count high, just that she didn't like his procedure. And I guess then all modern dairy pipeline systems are not in compliance with this woman's edict, because they all sanitize with 120 degree water pre-milking.
It's easier to just say F^&* it. I quit.
Hi. Is Maggies Farm familiar with Liberty Puzzles? If not, I very much recommend checking them out. Wonderful craftsmanship, and made in America - Boulder, CO. (customer, not affiliated in any manner.) Tom Gulick
"Congressmen Push for Food Freedom, Drink Unregulated Raw Milk"
Seriously do they understand why milk is pasteurized? I do not have a problem with any adult choosing to drink raw milk or consume products made from raw milk. But can this "food freedom" be accomplished while still keeping the rest of society safe? If raw milk is not regulated it WILL enter the food distribtion system and it will be served to people without their knowledge. In fact in every case in the last 20 years where raw milk has caused serious illness or death some of the people consuming it had no idea it was a raw milk product. Milk is pasteurized for safety; raw milk is the opposite. Why consume raw milk? I do understand it is a fad and like all fads the faddists are over the top in their beliefs about the fad. But shouldn't scientists on a panel whose job it is to make sure the food supply is safe be listened to when they tell us raw milk is not safe to drink? If raw milk were safe why would pasteurization have been implemented?
Milk production is already highly regulated at the local (county) and state level. No one is advocating rogue milk selling. Feds should concentrate on what they do best;
securing the border, growing the economy and making sure our enemies know we are a super-power.
And if drinking raw milk were unsafe, most of my neighbors would be dropping like flies. My husband and his brothers wouldn't have made it to adulthood, the umpteen dairy farmers and their families in this country would be sick or dead.
Are you saying we should not have an FDA and should not have any federal laws concerning food?
"if drinking raw milk were unsafe, most of my neighbors would be dropping like flies"
Raw milk is nothing more or less then a cow’s body fluids. Raw milk has been known to spread: typhoid, diphtheria, brucellosis, campylobacter, E. coli, Listeria, Salmonella, Yersinia spp., strep throat, scarlet fever, staphylococcus, rabies, Bacillus cereus, Coxiella burnetii, Mycobacterium avium and tuberculosis. Studies of milk from cows has shown that 30% to 60% of the samples have one or more of these pathogenic bacteria.
In 1985, an outbreak of listeria was linked to soft cheese made from raw milk produced in Los Angeles Of the 142 cases reported, 93 were in pregnant women or their children. There were 48 deaths, including 20 fetuses.
Since 1973, 394 cases of salmonella have been reported in Los Angeles County. Of these, 101 (25.6%) were consumers of raw milk.
The simple fact remains that raw milk is a health risk and both the CDC and the FDA have a legal responsibility to regulate it. This is not a case of runaway federal government going outside their constitutional responsibilities as some here have framed it. Congress passed legislation giving both the CDC and the FDA the responsibility to regulate and control dangerous products. If you truly think you can present a good argument that: A) Raw milk is not dangerous. And/or B) That the federal government does not have the legal and constitutional responsibility to protect citizens from dangerous food products. Then I suggest that you contact your congress and begin by convincing him.
Progressivism can't abide religion because it has gradually become a religion itself and doesn't like the competition. The only thing distinguishing it from a conventional religion is the lack of a definitive God or Messiah. Judging from my Facebook feed Jimmy Carter is about to fix that.