Wednesday morning links

Quicksearch

Blog Administration

Open login screen

RSS Readers

Wednesday, January 17. 2018

Are Mothers Happier Being Homemakers Or Working Full-Time?

Paul McCartney talks about how he became a bass player

Delightful interview 1994. Quote:

Actually he (James Jamerson) and Brian Wilson were my two biggest influences: James just because he was so good and melodic. Brian because he went to very unusual places. Brian would use, if you were playing in C, he might stay on the G a lot just to hold it all back, and I started to realize the power you had within the band.

Not actually vengeful power, just that you could actually... even though the whole band is going in A [sings single notes] you could go in E [sings surging single bass note], and they’d go, Let us off the hook! And you’re actually in control then, an amazing thing. So I sussed that and got particularly interested in playing the bass.

Why Leftists Hate Masculinity

Ohio State course reprimands white heterosexual masculinity

"Masculine" men do not assault women, bully people, or abuse their power. They do tend to feel horny often, however, and no rules can stop that.

Soda Tax Sticker Shock Grips Seattle

Mueller, McCabe & Rosenstein Involved in Cover-Up of FBI Probe Into Uranium-One Bribes

DHS preparing to arrest leaders of sanctuary cities

Those cities are declaring civil war

Good News: Great Whites Will Soon Be Swimming Near The Top Of The Statue Of Liberty

Is James Comey the least self-aware person in the US?

He certainly has high self-regard, tho... like most people with minimal self-awareness

Of Course Most Immigrants Come from Shithole Countries. So What?

Guess which state has the highest poverty rate in the country?

Shitholers of the World Are Making America Great

What I Learned in the Peace Corps in Africa: Trump Is Right

Trump’s right about the need to pick immigrants for skills

New Jersey’s New Governor Aggressively Favors Illegal Immigrants

Switzerland has followed New Zealand and a few other localities to outlaw boiling live lobsters.

Putin Pals Panic Over US "Corrupt Oligarchs" List, Begin Liquidating Assets

It’s official: US withholds $65 million in Palestinian aid, demands UN re-examination

Posted by Bird Dog in Hot News & Misc. Short Subjects at 07:19 | Comments (44) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

Lefties hate masculinity for the same reason they hate lots of other things that they're inept at: religious faith, financial planning, good manners, or calculus. It's Sour Grapes writ large, and rationalized as some sort of ideological preference, but deep-down underneath, they just couldn't cut it without rigging the game.

#1 Mike Anderson (Link) on 2018-01-17 08:17 (Reply)

QUOTE:

DHS preparing to arrest leaders of sanctuary cities ... Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen confirmed Tuesday that her department has asked federal prosecutors to see if they can lodge criminal charges against sanctuary cities that refuse to cooperate with federal deportation efforts.

That wouldn't be illegal under the anti-commandeering doctrine, as established by Prigg v. Pennsylvania in 1842, which held that states can't be required to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act, and that as it was a federal law, the federal government could enforce it. The finding was affirmed and expanded with Printz v. United States in 1997.

However, the states cannot interfere with federal officials, nor can they hide people from the federal officials.

#2 Zachriel on 2018-01-17 08:37 (Reply)

However, the states cannot interfere with federal officials, nor can they hide people from the federal officials.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Ummm....thats what they're doing when they refuse to provide information.

#2.1 Dale on 2018-01-17 09:48 (Reply)

Good to know ,

That wouldn't be illegal under the anti-commandeering doctrine,

So what's the problem, kiddiez?

#2.2 drowningpuppies on 2018-01-17 10:06 (Reply)

It's almost funny how the anti-commandeering doctrine gets brought out like Grandma's good china on immigration, but left in the closet on things like Title IX in Universities, curriculum standards in elementary schools, or most heinous of all, the 21 year-old drinking age and 55 MPH speed limit (now mostly done away with).

#2.3 another guy named Dan on 2018-01-17 10:45 (Reply)

It's a felony, Zach. The individual officials who do this are committing a felony. They are criminally liable.

"Any person who—

***

(iii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation;

(iv) encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law; or

(v)
(I) engages in any conspiracy to commit any of the preceding acts, or
(II) aids or abets the commission of any of the preceding acts,
shall be punished as provided in subparagraph (B).

(B) A person who violates subparagraph (A) shall, for each alien in respect to whom such a violation occurs—
(i) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(i) or (v)(I) or in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(ii), (iii), or (iv) in which the offense was done for the purpose of commercial advantage or private financial gain, be fined under title 18, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both;
(ii) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(ii), (iii), (iv), or (v)(II), be fined under title 18, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both;
(iii) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(i), (ii), (iii), (iv), or (v) during and in relation to which the person causes serious bodily injury (as defined in section 1365 of title 18) to, or places in jeopardy the life of, any person, be fined under title 18, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both; and
(iv) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(i), (ii), (iii), (iv), or (v) resulting in the death of any person, be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, fined under title 18, or both."

#2.4 Jim on 2018-01-17 13:10 (Reply)

Dale: Ummm....thats what they're doing when they refuse to provide information.

Again, this question was answered with Prigg v. Pennsylvania in 1842.

another guy named Dan: 55 MPH speed limit

The federal government can encourage participation, but can't require it, nor can it make the penalty so onerous as to preclude an actual choice. See National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius from 2012, where the court ruled that withholding existing Medicaid funding unless the states expanded Medicaid was unconstitutional.

another guy named Dan: The individual officials who do this are committing a felony. They are criminally liable.

The article said the issue was when the states "refuse to cooperate with federal deportation efforts". You can't force state agents to cooperate with enforcing federal law under the 10th Amendment — as the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled.

#2.5 Zachriel on 2018-01-17 14:13 (Reply)

First of all, check to see who you are quoting. The non-penalty penalty to a state for not mandating a 55 mph speed limit was the withholding of federal highway funds. Ditto for not adopting a 21 year-old drinking age. But as soon as it was suggested that Federal block grants to cities with sanctuary policies in place was suggested, the anti-commandeering doctrine got trotted out.

#2.5.1 another guy named Dan on 2018-01-17 14:51 (Reply)

another guy named Dan: check to see who you are quoting.

We cited the Supreme Court.

another guy named Dan: Ditto for not adopting a 21 year-old drinking age.

In a 1987 decision, South Dakota vs. Dole, the Supreme Court ruled that the the penalty was "not so coercive as to pass the point at which pressure turns into compulsion".

another guy named Dan: But as soon as it was suggested that Federal block grants to cities with sanctuary policies in place was suggested, the anti-commandeering doctrine got trotted out.

One of the five-point rules, according to the Supreme Court, is that the incentive must be "not so coercive as to pass the point at which pressure turns into compulsion".

#2.5.1.1 Zachriel on 2018-01-17 15:48 (Reply)

Ergo, the federal government can coerce and penalize a state for failing to uphold a mandate.

Thanks for proving it, kiddiez.

#2.5.1.1.1 drowningpuppies on 2018-01-17 17:26 (Reply)

No, you quoted another comment and attributed it to me.

My point was that if the doctrine is to be used to justify action, it should be used consistently. Withholding all federal funds from a college that does not have a deemed adequate Title IX enforcement policy is deemed non-coercive, but withholding law enforcement assistance or community development block grants is, perhaps not by you, but by those claiming that the Feds can't deny them to sanctuary cities.

And one of the things that makes the highway funding for 21 drinking age particularly odious to me is that highway assistance is an enumerated power under the constitution, while education and community development grants are not.

#2.5.1.1.2 another guy named Dan on 2018-01-17 18:17 (Reply)

another guy named Dan: No, you quoted another comment and attributed it to me.

Oops. Sorry.

another guy named Dan: My point was that if the doctrine is to be used to justify action, it should be used consistently.

Sure, which is why the Supreme Court set out a five-point rule in South Dakota vs. Dole.

another guy named Dan: Title IX enforcement policy is deemed non-coercive

Title IX is not a mere policy, but an enforcement of the 14th Amendment's guarantee of equal protection. Limiting highway speeds does not concern guaranteed rights under the Constitution (though many Americans might feel otherwise).

#2.5.1.1.2.1 Zachriel on 2018-01-18 08:03 (Reply)

QUOTE:

Shitholers of the World Are Making America Great

Notably, several majority Muslim-majority countries made the list. While not on the list, Nigerian and Norwegian immigrants in the U.S. have close to the same median income.

In any case, while many countries have problems, calling them s...holes is demeaning to the people of those countries and people who emigrated from those countries who still feel a connection to their homeland.

QUOTE:

Of Course Most Immigrants Come from Shithole Countries. So What?

Because Trump said he wanted to stop immigration from countries he considered s...holes, primarily in Africa, but wanted more immigration from what he considered non-s...hole countires, such as Norway.

He also said immigrants from Haiti all have AIDS, and that Nigerians all live in huts. Should we go on? How about the time he asked about a "pretty Korean lady" and why she wasn't working on North Korea, as if all Koreans know one another. (She was expert in hostage policy who was presenting information to him about an impending release of a family long held in Pakistan.) Or at a press conference when an African American reporter, April Ryan, asked Trump whether he would include the Congressional Black Caucus in conversations concerning urban issues, he asked her to set up the meeting (as if blacks all known one another). "Are they friends of yours?" he asked. Or the time where, in a major campaign speech, he implied that Mexican immigrants were drug dealers and rapists. ("And some, I assume, are good people.") Or the one where he said a judge couldn't be impartial because "He's a Mexican." (He was born in Indiana.)

#3 Zachriel on 2018-01-17 08:59 (Reply)

It all begs the question. First of all the immigrants legal and illegal from shithole countries have crime rates twice that of Americans of European descent. This is significant. You will often see America's crime rate or murder rate compared with some non-shithole countries like Canada or Norway and we come out second best. BUT when you compare the crime rate of Americans of European descent with these same countries America comes out ahead. Why is that? Because for whatever reason the people from shithole countries are shitholes and act that way whether they are here or back where they came from.

Second, these immigrants bring with them cultural norms that Americans find offensive. Things like cutting little girls clitoris off or raping women who dare walk around in public or constantly filing false charges of harassment to use our legal system to acquire a special status to acquire special treatment. Or that time honored and beloved cultural trait of killing your daughters when they act like normal humans. These are shithole traits that we do not need.

But most important is that we already have more people here than we can take care of. To many people who are homeless, on welfare, unemployed or under employed. Why would we bring in more people. It is irrational and perhaps terminally stupid. Let's get our own house in order before we spend any more money and effort with non-citizens. Let them get their own house in order if they really want to no longer live in shithole countries.

#3.1 OneGuy on 2018-01-17 09:42 (Reply)

I wish I had even half the advocacy, in my federal government, or even local government, as illegal immigrants do. In Colorado illegal immigrants literally get away with murder. Baffles the mind.

#3.1.1 B. Hammer on 2018-01-17 12:26 (Reply)

OneGuy: First of all the immigrants legal and illegal from shithole countries have crime rates twice that of Americans of European descent.

Darn those Germans Irish Italians Papists Puerto Ricans Mexicans immigrants du jour.

#3.1.2 Zachriel on 2018-01-17 14:19 (Reply)

Another fact you kiddiez can't dispute.

Misdirect much?

#3.1.2.1 drowningpuppies on 2018-01-17 17:18 (Reply)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=72&v=a-hPCnel0qc

#3.2 IdahoBob on 2018-01-17 10:08 (Reply)

There is no evidence That Trump said that immigrants from Haiti all have AIDS, Nigerians live in huts, or that he talked to the "pretty lady" as you've portrayed it.

It's all suppossedly attributable to "officials with direct knowledge of the exchange", "one person who attended the meeting and another person who was briefed about it by a different person who was there." etc.

In other words, anonymous sources that can't be confirmed.

Or again, to use your preferred defense of anything Hillary, there is no evidence to support the claims.

#3.3 Hank_M on 2018-01-17 14:31 (Reply)

Hank_M: There is no evidence That Trump said that immigrants from Haiti all have AIDS, Nigerians live in huts, or that he talked to the "pretty lady" as you've portrayed it.

You may not find the evidence convincing, but there is evidence of a pattern of such statements, including many such statements made publicly. Gee whiz. The guy was a birther for years.

#3.3.1 Zachriel on 2018-01-17 15:51 (Reply)

Evidence of a pattern of statements???

Gee whiz, kiddiez, y'all are reaching again.

#3.3.1.1 drowningpuppies on 2018-01-17 17:13 (Reply)

For what it's worth both Obama and his wife were "birthers" before he thought he might be president. It seems a little odd to claim you were born in Kenya and then once you actually have a shot at being elected president to hide that and deny you ever said it. There is more evidence that Obama was NOT born in Hawaii than there is that he was.

#3.3.1.2 OneGuy on 2018-01-17 18:33 (Reply)

OneGuy: For what it's worth both Obama and his wife were "birthers" before he thought he might be president.

Oh gee whiz. Obama wrote a book about his background, Dreams from My Father, long before he became president.

#3.3.1.2.1 Zachriel on 2018-01-18 08:05 (Reply)

Re: sanctuary cities

Every one of the Governors and Mayors took an oath of office to uphold the law.

#4 oolioo (Link) on 2018-01-17 09:44 (Reply)

oolioo: Every one of the Governors and Mayors took an oath of office to uphold the law.

That's right, and upholding the Constitution means that the federal government can't commandeer state officials. The state can cooperate or not. However, they can't interfere with federal agents, and they have to abide by court orders, such as when ordered to surrender a person wanted by the federal government. In most cases, however, there is simply a request made, which the state may or may not grant.

#4.1 Zachriel on 2018-01-17 15:54 (Reply)

So what if I order lobster in a Swiss restaurant? Is it served raw?

#5 Mike Anderson (Link) on 2018-01-17 10:11 (Reply)

Soda tax.

Gotta watch it though at Costco. Some years ago NYC managed to get (via court order) sales records for out of state mail order cigarette suppliers, and went after the residents for 'tax evasion'.

Everything you buy at Costco is associated with your Costco card. One court order away from problems.....

#6 jay on 2018-01-17 10:28 (Reply)

"Some years ago NYC managed to get (via court order) sales records for out of state mail order cigarette suppliers, and went after the residents for 'tax evasion'."

Glad to hear that US state governments are just as dedicated to free and untrammelled internal trade as our Canadian provincial ones are.

#6.1 JJM on 2018-01-17 12:01 (Reply)

Taking over the rural states one town at a time

Our newest experience of the power of Title IX and it's application by out--of--state feminist organizers can be seen here in these two articles.

First we have this claim .

Then we have this most recent response

You can look for more on this story by Googling
Missoulian+Frenchtown+Title IX

#7 Another One on 2018-01-17 11:20 (Reply)

Best thing to do with live lobsters is to put them in a pan with about an inch or so of room temperature cheap white wine 90 minutes before cooking. The booze sedates what little nervous system they have and relaxes their muscles so that they taste great.

#8 sixtyville on 2018-01-17 11:59 (Reply)

Sounds like a great start! Now cough up the rest of this wonderfully humane recipe. (I'm thinking saute with a bit of garlic and Old Bay, right in that pan.)

#8.1 Mike Anderson (Link) on 2018-01-17 12:30 (Reply)

Two Navy commanders charged with negligent homicide

It finally looks as if the US Navy is going to begin to understand the decline in education, ethics, etc., which we have all witnessed during the past 30 years. Negligent homicide and dereliction of duty are serious charges. Read here:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/navy-to-file-charges-against-ship-commanders-after-deadly-collisions

#9 faculty wife on 2018-01-17 12:39 (Reply)

Re: Frenchtown law suit.

You may remember in 2014 - 2015, the University of Montana had an "acquaintance rape case" that made national headlines. The gal was seen on security cameras shopping in the sex shop before going over to her boyfriends house, then she claimed rape. A big trial, lots of liberal media coverage and then John Krakauer wrote a book that was one of the best examples of unethical reporting. It is easy to see when one steps back and looks at both cases, who has arrived in Missoula Montana and what their purpose is--Frenchtown is only 17 miles from the U of M campus. A small rural town with two very sophisticated/trained mothers of teen daughters. Search the Missoulian newspaper for more stories on how this case "developed". Our two college towns were the only ones to vote against Trump. Do you suppose this has something to do with this assault? Of course, the campus in Bozeman (the other town who voted for Hillary) is headed up by a liberal feminist from Puerto Rico so no one is going to file a lawsuit against that school. Patterns are sometimes very easy to read.

#10 Apple Pie on 2018-01-17 13:02 (Reply)

Anyone remember the Rush Limbaugh/Katie Couric live lobster episode? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5yLAaVLqL8

#11 snopercod on 2018-01-17 14:14 (Reply)

How bout Larry the lobster on Sat.night live in the 70's?

#11.1 RL on 2018-01-17 14:47 (Reply)

As a mom with 2 pretty much grown kids, I will tell you my truth:

I would not have been happy being a full-time homemaker with kids for YEARS on end. However, I think staying home with the kids when they are young and before they go to school is important.

Let's give the honest truth, ladies, not all of us LIKE the work that goes along with making a home. I only like SOME of the cleaning aspects, the rest, I want to give over to a maid. I do like cooking and doing laundry, however. I find those tasks soothing and something I enjoy controlling.

I also know that I am too smart to just clean house and take care of children without some kind of mental stimulation and challenge to my life. And you cannot get that from mothers' groups and other social things. That only comes with WORK of some kind that takes you outside of your house and you mom/wife mindset.

The ideal would be to stay home and only be mom/wife while kids very small and need you a lot. Then, when they hit schoolage, take on a part-time stay-at-home style job (or if you want a part-time get-out-of-the-house style job. Makes you feel good to have a purpose outside of being someone's 'mom.'

I was lucky enough to be able to work full-time from home once my kids got into school and have been able to continue that once they left. But I still don't like certain household chores and never will.

#12 MissT on 2018-01-17 14:30 (Reply)

I understand the hunger for intellectual challenge. I also understand the need to feel that one is able and competent to do a job with some decision making freedom. Most importantly I understand why it is so addictive to tell every woman in American that she is a "leader". She has "right to lead". That is a terrible concoction of esteem building without merit. A strategy that removes all ethical, and moral shackles without consequence in order to liberate the women of the world. The sad thing is that a country led and dominated by human beings with this attitude without the intellectual skills is a terrifying place to be--therefore Trump!

#12.1 Another one on 2018-01-17 19:20 (Reply)

This.
My mom and my wife both got college degrees, then stayed home when kids were little. My mom started with a part-time job when the youngest (me) was in elementary school. I could walk from school to her office, and we'd go home together. She wound up with a high-power position that involved some travel by the time I was in high school.

Similar story with my wife - when dating for marriage (now THAT's a dinosaur phrase) I specifically sought a woman who wanted to stay home when the kids were little. My wife is also full time now that our baby is in the army.

"You can have it all - just not all at once." And it's terribly sad that many women, by placing career first, prevent a more natural progression from unfolding. No arguing with biology.

The unspoken context of all this is that you need a stable marriage before you can even think about being a stay-home mom... I am posting this as another thread on Maggie reports that 40 percent of births are to unwed moms. I become ever more convinced that the hard-core Left is playing a cynical game of percentages, not caring how many people suffer as long as the Judeo-Christian West is destabilized.

#12.2 Ben David on 2018-01-18 04:50 (Reply)

ICE strikes deal with Florida sheriffs to hold illegal immigrants

QUOTE:

The new agreement’s backers said it solves that problem, using the same model that localities follow when they hold people for the U.S. Marshals Service.

https://www.washingtontimes.com

#13 drowningpuppies on 2018-01-17 14:31 (Reply)

Jordan Peterson wipes the floor with interviewer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcjxSThD54

#14 Jake on 2018-01-17 20:26 (Reply)

She got Petersoned.

#14.1 Fred on 2018-01-17 21:18 (Reply)

Regarding the interview

http://quillette.com/2018/01/17/jordan-b-peterson-critical-theory-new-bourgeoisie/

#14.1.1 Fred on 2018-01-19 18:15 (Reply)

"Are Mothers Happier"--as if you could generalize. Are Fathers happier if they work 80 hours a week to pursue their ambition and hardly know their kids? Some are, some aren't, depends on what they most want to get out of life. If Fathers won the lottery, would they spend more time with the kids? Some would. Amazingly, there also are individual differences among women, even women with children. Settle a secure lifetime income on someone, an amount that can't be lost to divorce, and see what happens. The parents with crappy jobs will quit; those with fulfilling work will work. Letting someone else support you raises other issues: it may be fun to stay home with the kiddos this year, and disastrous later if he wanders off.

#15 Texan99 on 2018-01-17 21:51 (Reply)

Really enjoyed that McCartney interview.

#16 Texan99 on 2018-01-17 22:31 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email	(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications. Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u], [url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here. Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications. To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: BBCode format allowed
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Maggie's Farm

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

RSS Readers

Wednesday, January 17. 2018

Wednesday morning links