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
Wednesday, November 16. 2016
Dylan’s reply when a fan gushed, “You don’t know who I am, but I know who you are.” Dylan: “Let’s keep it that way.”
Found Sketchbook With Drawings Is Not By Van Gogh, According To Van Gogh Museum
One fact about New England stone walls
Sheep? I am not sure about that.
‘We Couldn’t Believe Our Eyes’: A Lost World of Shipwrecks Is Found
The Case Against Cats - The animal so many dote on is among the world’s most destructive predators.
Universities devolve into pre-schools
Protests shook Yale a year ago. Here’s what has changed since.
PRO-ISRAEL ARTIST 5 YEARS IN JAIL FOR ANTI-TERROR POSTERS AT GMU
Better Off Before Obamacare?
Twitter Initiates Mass Purge Of Prominent Alt-Right Accounts Following Trump Victory
I still do not know what alt-right is, but I guess they do
Was he alt-right too?
Trump's transition team bristles with … conservatives!
Alan Dershowitz Defends Steve Bannon: ‘Not Legitimate To Call Somebody An Anti-Semite Because You Disagree With Their Policies’
A Latino barista
WHY ARE DEMOCRAT-DOMINATED INSTITUTIONS SUCH CESSPITS OF MISOGYNY AND SEXUAL EXPLOITATION?
Donald Trump’s victory exposes liberal hypocrisy on free expression and democracy.
STANDING OVATION for Donald Trump on New York Night Out
Trump Sticks with People Who Stuck by Him, Media Bewildered
They will freak out about everything. Honey Badger don't care
Obama's sad legacy
Obama warns against a "crude sort of nationalism"
Washington Post Hopes Trump Fails
They will do their utmost to make that happen
Krauthammer’s Take: Obama ‘Destroyed His Presidency’ with Liberal Overreach
Obama in a state of denial about Trump, as Democrats work through the stages of grief
Hillary Clinton Screaming Obscenities and Throwing Objects in Election Night Meltdown
That's her MO
Clinton Campaign Official Invokes ‘Internalized Misogyny’ in Talking About Women’s Vote
European Temper Tantrumps: "A World Is Collapsing Before Our Eyes"
Get a grip
Stock of Israeli Company Specializing in ‘Smart’ Border Fences on Sharp Rise Since Trump Election
America wants legal immigration
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
Van Gogh? I would be surprised! They look nothing like the real thing to me, although I am not a scholar.
I've seen that article before, a journalist took the claims from the book and asked wildlife biologists who let their own cars run free how they could justify it.
What struck me then was how evidence free the book is -- if you are looking for opinion based advice on cats being indoor or outdoor, one could also look to the RSPB:
"there is no scientific evidence that predation by cats in gardens is having any impact on bird populations UK-wide. This may be surprising, but many millions of birds die naturally every year, mainly through starvation, disease, or other forms of predation. There is evidence that cats tend to take weak or sickly birds."
"It is likely that most of the birds killed by cats would have died anyway from other causes before the next breeding season, so cats are unlikely to have a major impact on populations."
The Weggler/Leu 2001 study of black redstarts has been praised as one of the few studies of cat predation without any methodological problems -- they surveyed the change on redstart population in villages with an unusually large number of feral cats, and found that while cat predation lowered the reproductive productivity by 12%, there was not enough of an effect to cause decline of the bird population.
Many studies fail to disaggregate feral cats, which may depend upon wildlife for the entirety of their diet, with domestic cats which are well fed and may be restricted to indoors at times-of-day when prey animals are most active.
From my observations, mice and rats are a pretty basic food source for out door cats.
Are we going to see an article about the destructiveness and health hazards associated with these rodents?
The "case against cats" is simply raging against the natural order of things.
Yeah, the several outdoor cats I've known over an adulthood of more than 60 years, have concentrated on mice, small rats, voles, skinks, geckos, grass hoppers, locusts and such. Maybe once or twice a year they drag in a sick looking songbird. Wonder why the tearful crowd never harps about the rodents, reptiles and insects. Could it be because they're icky? (Rodents etc., not tearful crowd.)
Instinctive cat hatred is probably a minor disorder of some kind. It's not uncommonly found in dog-lovers and horse-lovers and in folks who love all other animals too because they taste good like God intended with BBQ sauce like God intended.
Funny, among this tribe of unconscious culture-signalers is the notion that killing animals is good for them because it prevents them starving. Not so apparently when cats do it, cats taking the evolutionary lowest-hanging fruit whereas rock-ribbed "sportsmen" blow holes through perfectly stationary twelve-point prize buck deer with razor-tipped arrows from $2000 bows, leaving them to bleed out in terror for half an hour. Then it's back to the bar for a nice cheeseburger from a cow hung by a back leg for her throat to be slit over a trough.
Meat signalers never did make much sense.
Our family has owned close to a dozen cats over the last decade. I am not cat lover or cat hater. But it seems like at least once a week our cats take down a bird. I can tell because there is a splash zone of feathers spread over about a 2 foot radius after a kill. Our cats almost always eat the whole bird. They seldom eat the whole field mice they drag up on our patio. I am glad to see the little carnivores earning their keep and heartily approve of the mice kills.
I have a relative who wants to be a veterinarian because of her love for animals. She has stopped eating meat because she is concerned for the animal cruelty perpetrated in slaughter houses. I told her, around a bite of succulent steak, that she is right. The world is cruel. And if we want to end animal cruelty, we should kill all cats. They love killing animals slowly. And painfully. Our cats have killed more animals than I ever have.
Sure. You've been eating meat for no good reason since you were a child. Tons of it. But a cat with a fifteen year lifespan is a moral problem.
Heard somewhere in the right-wing echochamber:
Hillary Clinton Screaming Obscenities and Throwing Objects in Election Night Meltdown
Maybe you should wear 2 safety pins...one in each ear. That may help keep your demon quiet. Just trying to help.
Oh, well! That settles it! Snopes says it's unproven! Then it couldn't have happened.
Besides we know how honest unbiased network CNN is. Why they would NEVER spike a story that puts Hillary in a bad light.
mudbug: Oh, well! That settles it! Snopes says it's unproven!
No. It's not unproven because they say so, but because, as they point out, the only evidence is someone who admits he trolls for profit. Not to mention it requires a conspiracy of many, with the admitted troll the only one who is telling the truth.
Usually I disagree with Zachriel, but in this particular case he's right. Vague stories about meltdowns on election night tap right into people's preexisting ideas about Hillary Clinton, so it 'feels' right that such a story exists. However if she really had turned into the Incredible Hulk that night we would have heard about it much more quickly and from more than one person.
Remember: "When something sounds too good to be true, it usually is."
"...people's preexisting ideas about Hillary Clinton..." Ideas ?WTF?
Those pre-existing "ideas" are based upon reports of a large number of people who have actually been around the Hildebeast as a matter of professional responsibility: Dick Morris, FBI agents, Secret Service agents, ex-military assigned to the Clintons. These people all report that that nasty woman is exactly that, a very nasty, profane and ill-tempered woman, who's an alcoholic!
Its not just ideas, its FACT!
JM01, JM02, JM03, JM04.... are you studying to be a Z-bot?
It is interesting that you admit that this story about a drunken hillary screaming obscenities and throwing things fits in so exactly with "people's preexisting ideas about Hillary Clinton". Artificial intelligence isn't quite ready for prime time yet.
And Zach complaining about a paid troll writing about a violently screaming hillary (who is his perfect vagina godess, is priceless. Made my day !!!
You should be so skeptical about all of your beliefs.
Hey, there's a sticker with the word gullible on the ceiling above you!
Who cares about Ms. Rodham. She lost and is forever irrelevant. Time to look forward not back.
Yeah, it seems unlikely. Those reports say she used foul language and threw "objects." The fact that they didn't specify the language or the objects is suspicious. Everybody knows that she has a penchant for racial slurs and her missile of choice is a lamp. Someone who described the situation so broadly couldn't have actually been there. Besides, it's so out of character for her! She has such a calm temperament!
Of course if someone had been there and reported that it happened, that wouldn't have been enough evidence for you that it happened. Would it, Zach?
mudbug: Of course if someone had been there and reported that it happened, that wouldn't have been enough evidence for you that it happened.
It's the evidence that's lacking. Consider the sole source of the story also said,
"LOL Gwen Ifill just croaked. What a wonderful year!" and
"I trigger liberals for fun and profit. You should try it."
But if it feels true ...
To your point, this is a second hand account and not worthy of a news piece.
I didn't say it was true. I only point out that it fits what we already know about Hillary - she has a foul mouth and a violent temper. It fits what we know about CNN - that they are biased for Hillary and cover for her. It also fits what we know about the situation - normally the candidate will come out and address his supporters at some point during election night, but Podesta did it instead.
That doesn't mean that Hillary was pitching a nuclear fit and throwing things. It could mean that she was too drunk to go out to address her supporters. It could mean that she was too sick to go to to address her supporters. It could mean that she didn't give a flip about her supporters and didn't want to bother addressing them because she found something better to do.
We don't know the truth (yet), but that's also not unusual with the Clintons.
mudbug: I didn't say it was true.
No. You said it was truthy.
First, truthy doesn't mean untrue.
Second, you have no explanation for her absence at her election night gathering.
mudbug: First, truthy doesn't mean untrue.
That's correct! That's why our comment was "Heard somewhere in the right-wing echochamber ..."
mudbug: you have no explanation for her absence at her election night gathering.
One doesn't have to provide an explanation to point out a story is poorly sourced.
Clinton conceded about 2:30 AM in the East. Trump didn't declare until 2:50 AM. Most people were asleep, everyone was exhausted, so waiting until later in the morning is reasonable.
Why the Big Lie About Steve Bannon?
Bannon, executive chairman of Breitbart News, said "We're the platform for the alt-right." Breitbart published An Establishment Conservative's Guide to the Alt-Right. The article identified Richard Spencer and Steve Sailer as the intellectual core of the movement.
Richard Spencer: “Our dream is a new society, an ethno state that would be the gathering point for all Europeans. It would be a new society based on very different ideals than, say, the Declaration of Independence.”
Steve Sailer: “Look, ‘Let the good times roll' is especially or risky message for African-Americans. The plain fact is that they tend to possess poorer native judgment than members of better educated groups. Thus, they need stricter moral guidance from society.”
Richard Spencer: “Today, in the public imagination, ethnic cleansing has been associated with civil war and mass murder, understandably so. But this does not need to be the case.”
So who coined the term 'alt-right' and when did it first come into use? That is what I'd like to know.
I believe that the Democrats and the left decided to take this term and twist it into some scary KKK-type group. Go back to the crazy speech by Clinton about the 'alt-right' that went nowhere in reality, but only ginned up the fears of her follower.
I read Breitbart every day, Zachriel. It is not a white supremacist website. It is a news site and a humorous site for conservatives. It mixes harder news stories with commentary on the left that cracks me up.
You really think that millions of people who read Breitbart are secret KKK members? Really?
Maybe look at the site every once in awhile, like I do with Huffington Post. Something that 'offends' you is not white supremacist hate speech.
Figure out the difference.
MissT: So who coined the term 'alt-right' and when did it first come into use? That is what I'd like to know.
MissT: I believe that the Democrats and the left decided to take this term and twist it into some scary KKK-type group.
The term originated on the right. It was popularized by Robert Spencer.
MissT: I read Breitbart every day, Zachriel. It is not a white supremacist website.
See previous post.
MissT: Maybe look at the site every once in awhile
Of course we do. That should be fairly obvious.
In other words, alt-right has multiple meanings and attributions depending on what group your want to disparage. Thanks.
Zach, some potentially good news for you. Trump may appoint someone to keep an eye on Mr, Bannon
According to Bloomberg, Donald Trump is considering nominating Texas Senator Ted Cruz to serve as U.S. attorney general.
Ted Cruz is very smart, having a liberal education at Harvard. He could help you prove your major thesis that the clinton crime family foundation is as pure as the driven snow. Perhaps AG Cruz could help the FBI prove for you that the Weiner files are all yoga pants and wedding pictures. Maybe he can release the "lolita express" and Orgy island" records under federal court seal, made at the request of he Justice department, to help you prove slick willy was not there. Maybe he could look into the Fast $ Furious and Benghazi situations to help you prove your point that public concerns in these matters are just false "truthiness" rumors.
You should be very happy about this possibility !!!
The Z-Bot(s) programming probably doesn't permit it to comment directly on that pattern of evidence, Jaybird. Z-Bot(s) programming appears evidently coded to make it strive at great lengths to assert or conflict any immediate, specific criticism of a figure as unprovable and therefore as unfounded. You can see the inherent fallacy right off.
Therefore Z-Bot(s) rules the apparent fact, as you well note, that a figure enveloped in a 40 year pattern of such evidence of behavior, as it's currently made difficult or impossible to investigate and prosecute, is morally pure. The disconnect in that is obvious.
Humans naturally see through this programmed red herring: Just because a figure cannot be prosecuted due to external, extenuating circumstances doesn't exonerate or indemnify a figure's character or actual legality.
Of just as much consequence is the apparent fact that a nearly wholly complicit media has created this climate of professional, national, popular bullshitting and its gaslighting tone, or in extreme cases - as we've found just these past few days - a highly notable figurehead in this media establishment will been found to have operated a "journalistic" culture so perverse that standard procedure for years was for "reporters" to fit all framing - we certainly can't call it reporting anymore - to a preordained narrative. All material was collected and prepared not to report on objective reality, but to contain a framing bias aimed at furthering a particular socio-political narrative. This us real humans call yellow journalism.
Aside from the fact the robotic programming seems to have been developed by these same sorts, the point is that none of this pervasive bias is yet suitable to enlighten a reasoning machine dedicated to furthering the same basic phenomenon! The output will appear stilted, dimensionless, and predictable until such time higher functions can be installed.
Correction: Strike "rules the apparent fact" in the second paragraph and insert "tacitly asserts". I'm not a robotic poster and so am prone to usual human error. At the least.
Ten, you are saying that Z-Bots can't detect sarcasm? Or even experience cognitive dissonance. (I was hoping maybe to get the Z-bot into an endless programming loop, which might be the machine equivalence of a zombie trance occasioned by absence of an exit branch..
Bannon must be destroyed. It is the classic left wing politics of personal destruction. It is classic Saul Alinski. It is classic Marxist/leninist/communism. He must be destroyed because he unashamedly speaks truth, he stands up when the left wants him to sit down, he challenges them in ways that they cannot answer. I fully expect half a dozen women to come out of the woodwork and claim he insulted/groped or was mean to them in some way. He will be labeled a sexist, racist homophobe and witnesses will be paid and trundled out to substantiate it. Afterwards those witnesses will be given professorships at obscure universities as their reward. It is even possibble that Bannon will die of a sudden heart attack even though his is in good health...
settled down in my easy chair last night to watch NCIS. But whoa! What's this? The first NCIS after the Trump win and the plot is about an immigrant who has to be deported because of some legal issue. The show spent most of the time showing how really, really nice this guy is and how he really didn't deserve to be deported and how unfair it all is. After a couple years of every TV show putting gays into the plot now I guess we are going to be lectured to about illegals for years. I find myself enjoying these lectures less and less. Goodbye NCIS.
Same thing happened to me when checking out the new show 'Designated Survivor.' I watched 2 1/2 episodes and then stopped. The thing that did it for me: Michigan governor (white man) painted as a horrible, racist, Islamophobe with Ruby Ridge-style beliefs. And every conservative viewpoint/character was painted as a cartoon...either as a loon or 'radical.'
Bye-bye, 'Designated Survivor.' Not going to give you my time.
the guy was a legal permanent resident (not illegal vermin) facing removal (deportation) because of an "aggravated felony" (a term of art), in this case, a one year prison term for a bar fight. NCIS probably misstates the law (and does misstate it in the Ninth Circuit), and any competent attorney could stop the deportation with ease.
anyway, the episode seems to be a slap at Barry's administration.
Same here. There is little viewing competition on Tuesday night, but I could tell where the show would be going after just a few seconds. Off with the TV. I've had enough of the continual propaganda via TV shows.
Over the years MF ers have read my thoughts on the extremely powerful women who run Seattle/WA State. That power is a gift inherited from seven or eight generations of a few families building one of the world's largest economic empires. It is was this group that decided it was time for a black president and installed Obama--and, of course it was this group that tried to install Hillary.
However, I think most of you have doubted my claim that they were even strong enough to control all the universities within that state. I encourage you to consider this
Note: I love the Jesuit University and the traditions of excellence, but we must remember this: their mission is to keep their schools open in spite of the political climate in which they find themselves . in the year 2040 they will have been in the education business for 500 years, except for the years when the schools were closed down due to politics. I just wish that they did not feel so powerless that they had to hire this one!
RE One fact about New England stone walls
(if sheep can see the next field, they want to go there)
clearly a reason for the Great Wall of Trump
Will Bithers: clearly a reason for the Great Wall of Trump
Think it's been recast as the Bigly Fence of Trump.
Yale's change in a year? Same old same old.
Pro-Israel Artist: How COULD he slander those peaceful terrorists?
Twitter: "I still do not know what alt-right is, but I guess they do. " Well THEY think so, and that's good enough for them. Far as I can tell, it's a term of disapproval. Maybe even hate. Probably just "talking back".
Obama, what we want is an elegant nationalism.
Europe, it's YOUR world that is collapsing before your eyes. You should do something about that.
I'm reading von Mises' 'Bureaucracy'. Under the section on the psychological consequences of bureaucratization, he describes the pre-WWI youth movement in Germany. It seems to have a lot in common with what is going on at universities today. In truth after the advance of the interventionist, bureaucratic state, the kids really do have little hope for the future outside of some cube drone. They don't know the gloriousness of the alternative of free enterprise and capitalism. Now that we have Trump, he could, like Reagan, bring back hope and these kids will see a world outside of socialism, a world with hope.
HIGH-BROWS turn up their noses at Horatio Alger’s philosophy. Yet Alger succeeded better than anybody else in stressing the most characteristic point of capitalist society. Capitalism is a system under which everybody has the chance of acquiring wealth; it gives everybody unlimited opportunity. Not everybody, of course, is favored by good luck. Very few become millionaires. But everybody knows that strenuous effort and nothing less than strenuous effort pays. All roads are open to the smart youngster. He is optimistic in the awareness of his own strength. He has self-confidence and is full of hope. And as he grows older and realizes that many of his plans have been frustrated, he has no cause for despair. His children will start the race again and he does not see any reason why they should not succeed where he himself failed. Life is worth living because it is full of promise.
All this was literally true of America. In old Europe there still survived many checks inherited from the ancien régime. Even in the prime of liberalism, aristocracy and officialdom were struggling for the maintenance of their privileges. But in America there were no such remnants of the Dark Ages. It was in this sense a young country, and it was a free country. Here were neither industrial codes nor guilds. Thomas Alva Edison and Henry Ford did not have to overcome any obstacles erected by shortsighted governments and a narrow-minded public opinion.
Under such conditions the rising generation are driven by the spirit of the pioneer. They are born into a progressing society, and they realize that it is their task to contribute something to the improvement of human affairs. They will change the world, shape it according to their own ideas. They have no time to waste, tomorrow is theirs and they must prepare for the great things that are waiting for them. They do not talk about their being young and about the rights of youth; they act as young people must act. They do not boast about their own “dynamism”; they are dynamic and there is no need for them to emphasize this quality. They do not challenge the older generation with arrogant talk. They want to beat it by their deeds.
But it is quite a different thing under the rising tide of bureaucratization. Government jobs offer no opportunity for the display of personal talents and gifts. Regimentation spells the doom of initiative. The young man has no illusions about his future. He knows what is in store for him. He will get a job with one of the innumerable bureaus, he will be but a cog in a huge machine the working of which is more or less mechanical. The routine of a bureaucratic technique will cripple his mind and tie his hands. He will enjoy security. But this security will be rather of the kind that the convict enjoys within the prison walls. He will never be free to make decisions and to shape his own fate. He will forever be a man taken care of by other people. He will never be a real man relying on his own strength. He shudders at the sight of the huge office buildings in which he will bury himself.
In the decade preceding the First World War Germany, the country most advanced on the path toward bureaucratic regimentation, witnessed the appearance of a phenomenon hitherto unheard of: the youth movement. Turbulent gangs of untidy boys and girls roamed the country, making much noise and shirking their school lessons. In bombastic words they announced the gospel of a golden age. All preceding generations, they emphasized, were simply idiotic; their incapacity has converted the earth into a hell. But the rising generation is no longer willing to endure gerontocracy, the supremacy of impotent and imbecile senility. Henceforth the brilliant youths will rule. They will destroy everything that is old and useless, they will reject all that was dear to their parents, they will substitute new real and substantial values and ideologies for the antiquated and false ones of capitalist and bourgeois civilization, and they will build a new society of giants and supermen.
The inflated verbiage of these adolescents was only a poor disguise for their lack of any ideas and of any definite program. They had nothing to say but this: We are young and therefore chosen; we are ingenious because we are young; we are the carriers of the future; we are the deadly foes of the rotten bourgeois and Philistines. And if somebody was not afraid to ask them what their plans were, they knew only one answer: Our leaders will solve all problems.
von Mises, Ludwig (1945). Bureaucracy
Thanks for Barista quote.
One of my former professors wrote a book about the Alamo and said he was there one day. He saw a Latino taking it all in and then a pasty white college kid walked up to the Latino and said something like "I am so sorry that my people stole Texas from yours." The Latino turned to the kid and said "I'm not. Texas is my home and I love it. If Santa Anna had won, this would still have been a sh!thole like Juarez." and walked away.
Anyone that assumes all members of a group have the same goals or views is due for a reality check. There are Latinos in Texas who hate the idea of unlimited illegal immigration at least as much as Trump is alleged to hate it.
Jerry - the mexicans are very angry at the division of land. Texas got all the good cities, roads, land and infrastructure, universities.
THey are right. As you can see from a satellite view, the parts on the other side of the rio grande can be downright disgusting.
The Mexican frontier province of Coahuila y Tejas after 1821 was a difficult place to convince Mexicans to settle (as well as before Independence). The Comanches were far too fierce, savage almost beyond belief and as a matter of policy: torture, mutilate and kill all the men in the most inventive and visibly savage ways possible; rape, torture, mutilate and kill all the women, burn everything you can't take with you, and kidnap the young children to be raised as Comanches.
The young country of Mexico in 1824 took a gamble for three years and invited Anglos settlers to come in, promising them free land and autonomy. The Anglos poured across the border, and the Mexicans realized that if they didn't stop it now, they would lose control of Tejas, so they shut down the Anglo welcome wagon in 1827. Oops, too late. The illegal immigrant Anglos continued to flood. The rest is history.
Geography is destiny. Other than the central plateau where everybody lives, so much of Mexico is jungle, or mountains with narrow river valleys. Tejas was the promised land, but between the Comanches and the Anglos they couldn't keep it and lost it. There is a placard in the Mexico City Museum on their Independence and Revolution, that expresses it so well. Translating from the Spanish, it says near as I can figure, "Of all the unfortunate things that happened to our young and poor country, losing Tejas was the worst." And I agree with that.
The time I spent working in Mexico, was with the nicest and friendliest and most courteous people I have ever worked with anywhere. They want what we want: a way to make a living, and a better life for their children. By geography and history and culture, they started far behind us after Independence. We were blessed, and they weren't. They by our standards are poor, and we are heedlessly rich. They warned us, watch out, there are plenty of people more than willing to rip off the stupid rich gringos.
We need not be adversaries. We can be good neighbors. We can even be neighbors that care for each other. And good fences help make good neighbors.
There are so many lessons from this bit of history. Control your borders or you will lose your country. Establish the rule of law and defend your country and your people, or you will lose your country. Don't bring in strangers or neighbors who don't share your values. No country has a right to exist: if you can't or won't defend your country and culture, you will lose it to somebody else.
Re: The Obsession with Race Is Eroding Our Ability to Reason
Of course it is, and isn't that the plan? Didn't Orwell have something to say about how words are thoughts put into communicable form and if you banish the words the ideas become not just incommunicable but literally unthinkable? I could see in a generation of usage that if you don't like radical Islam, why, you're suffering from Islamaphobia - despite the fact that a phobia is an irrational fear and a rational dislike is something entirely different. But how do you communicate that radical Islam is a problem when the very term "Islamaphobia" is an admission that you yourself are the one with a disorder?
Interesting article on Airbnb. Have a family member who kitted out the lower level and booked clients on Airbnb. However, owners were always there, and this was a single family dwelling.
Much different if you're in a condo, particularly in a high-rise one where there are a fair few units which have been bought specifically to rent out on Airbnb. Suddenly, owners who live in that high-rise find there is a regular influx of strangers, security keys handed out to all and sundry, and general condo rules are ignored. Indeed, the incomers take full advantage of the laundry rooms, with scant regard for the needs of the regular residents, and are known to take over party rooms and other amenities at their convenience - again with little or no regard to the plans or wishes of the residents.
It's one thing for a person to rent out all or part out of his/her own home; it's quite another thing for said person to own several places - particularly apartments - specifically for short-term rentals it what are supposed to be residential buildings. The occasional Airbnb listing by a condo owner is one thing; turning a batch of units into commercial entities is quite another. When the commercial activity interferes with the owner/residents' security, safety, and enjoyment of their premises, then said commercial activity needs to be disallowed, pronto.