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
Thursday, May 16. 2019
US Birth Rate Plunges To All-Time Low As More Women Choose Careers Over Families
Highly Potent Weed Has Swept The Market, Raising Concerns About Health Risks
Say, Is ‘Climate Change’ Causing Problems With Home Values Near The Sea?
Salon Media Announces $5 Million Sale, ‘Bankruptcy and Liquidation’ Threatened If Deal Fails
NYU Journalism Teacher: The GOP Is 'A Terrorist Organization'
Harvard Betrays A Law Professor — And Itself
What are the odds that the Durham investigation is for real and will bring the bad actors to justice?
Special Prosecutor John Durham Targeting CIA in its Role in Origins of Spygate – Brennan’s Actions Will ‘Come Into Sharper Focus’
AG Barr Mocks Pelosi to Her Face: “Madam Speaker, did you bring your handcuffs?”
Moscow to Implement Facial Recognition AI to Monitor City
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
Great AP work on the impact of climate change on pricey coastal properties. Starting strong with "some research suggests," it pivots immediately to praise of the "laudable" research efforts to highlight the climate danger we all just know is there, then sadly admits that the research is "flawed" because it doesn't quite actually, you know, manage to find the danger, given that prices actually are rising faster for coastal properties than inland ones. Strong finish with the assumption that coastal prices would have risen even faster if not for climate change. In fact, vulnerable retirees already have lost $15 billion in potential value that was dangling right there, snatched cruelly away by climate change! The damage is real, people.
Well said Tex99!!
You are on a roll today, and I do mean that as a compliment.
I stopped reading as soon as I figured out the subject of the story was Massachusetts. The "I-was-Politically-Correct-before-it-was-called-PC", "Don't Blame Me, I voted for McGovern" state, or as Jimmy Baker once put it, the only Socialist state in the USA.
The thing is MA is not a particularly socialist or "progressive" state in its day-to-day. We/they (I've lived here my whole life, even as a Republican) verbally espouse all sorts of lefty philosophies and opinions, but very few folks actually arrange their lives around them. The taxes aren't even that bad--we have a flax income tax, not graduated, for example.
Yes, well...I grew up there, in a trendy "West-of-Bahston" suburb. Where our school system volunteered (unilaterally) to bus in ghetto kids at the local taxpayer's expense, to do our PC part during the South Boston busing crisis; instantly importing a huge drug pipeline, kids getting high in the hallways, kids getting hooked on the hard stuff, strung-out cheerleaders turning tricks in the Combat Zone, etc. etc. But hey: The School Board felt really good about themselves. It seemed to me that anyone working for the state, county, or township was more than happy to be progressive with the other people's money and well-being. And at 18, I was still having to pay an excise tax every year on a 36-year-old car, just to keep it on the road. Glad to hear it has changed for the better.
A beachfront lot here in SW Florida, $2.5 to $3 million. Same lot half a block off the beach, $350 thousand. Who knew?
Every time I read climate change articles I am reminded of the extraterrestrial alien shows on the History Channel.
re What are the odds that the Durham investigation is for real and will bring the bad actors to justice?
We don't know. Only time will tell.
Our betters' credibility is gone. Seeing is believing.
Great quote from Rush as he was talking about Durham.
RUSH: Holy cow. Some of you people are on fire out there today. I checked the email during the break, and I got a bunch of people sending me notes. “I don’t care about this guy’s resume. I’m fed up with hearing about people’s resume!” They’re talking about the guy that Barr has appointed. “I’m gonna wait see results. I don’t care what this guy’s done. You know, that’s all we get. We get resumes, we get past history, we get performance, we get our hopes raised, we get our expectations raised, and then nothing ever happens.
“So you can stuff this guy’s resume, Mr. Limbaugh, as far as I’m concerned. I’m waiting to see if anybody delivers on this.” I understand the sentiment, folks. I understand the sentiment. I can count as easily as you can the number of times over whatever length of time in the past you want, 30 years, 10 years, 15, five, it doesn’t matter. The number of times we’ve been led to believe that heads are gonna roll, things are gonna happen, the bad guys are gonna get caught. I mean, for two years we’ve been, “Breaking news! Breaking news!
“The bottom’s gonna fall out tomorrow,” and it never does. “Breaking news! Breaking news! Heads are gonna roll tomorrow,” and they never do. “Breaking news! Breaking news! Full operation exposed, details tomorrow morning,” whatever. Never happens.
Absolutely correct, feeblemind.
Let me know when they’re walked to their arraignment. Otherwise, STFU.
This is a watershed moment. Either we root out the perps in this Russian collusion hoax and put them in jail or we don't and we will see this tactic repeated by the left again. Either we are a country of laws that apply to all equally or we are not. IMHO Durham should not only bring the perpetrators to trial but also anyone who tries to interfere with this investigation and prosecution. Because the Democrats are in full coverup mode right now and it is their intent to stop or disrupt this investigation. Send them a message that obstruction will not be tolerated.
The left is caught in another terrible short sighted mistake. For forty years they have encouraged women (all colors) to have fewer children. Life is good with fewer kids. But, now there is a little problem to all of that:
1. you cannot sustain "GROWTH", which our economic reality is based upon, unless you have a growing population base.
2. You cannot sustain our democratic effort to maintain equilibrium among the races if only white women are refraining from having children. The new world picture with a very small "white" population is not what the 'agents of change' foresaw. Their expectation was that women of all colors would have fewer children--not just white women.
We're going to have a SALON
In 1998, the idea of having A Salon was a big deal among the literati, the agents of change, etc. Of course, the idea was not new--it has been a fashionable idea during many historical eras, but it came around once again in the late 1990's. Of course A Salon requires certain polite guidelines to succeed:
1. treating each person with respect in spite of their opinion
2. debating with appropriate rhetorical techniques (too hard to master for most of the "new intellects".
3. assumption of "informed opinion" is that the speaker is using factual information to debate.
4. who, or how, does the bill get paid? Do you invite an informed speaker? Then what happens to the equality amongst members format? Salons fail as they always do when members stop seeking truth and rage replaces reasoned exchange as the acceptable guideline for conversation. Rather than climate change I would propose that RAGE is the greatest evil we confront today. It deadens the exchange of ideas and causes conversations to fail, i.e. SALON.
BTW if you Google SALON Media you will find that on several occasions recently members of presented their arguments in favor of pedophilia. What is it with that generation? Why must they always feel that their unique self should "Shock the world"? When did "thinking outside of the box" become a mandate to "shock"?
you cannot sustain "GROWTH", which our economic reality is based upon, unless you have a growing population base.
If our economic system requires infinite growth to succeed then it needs to be replaced.
I agree. However, the first step is not to appoint Who shall change it, or re-design it. Rather the first step is to acknowledge this reality and then decide what value system will be in place while we make the necessary changes. Can't do that with folks whose value system changes with every new bumper sticker.
What are the odds that the Durham investigation is for real and will bring the bad actors to justice? Right now, I'm optimistic.
60-40 - you pick.
I'm hopeful - but I've been disappointed before. What Comey's investigation admitted Hillary had done should have put her in Leavenworth for mishandling classified info, but it seems some people are simply too high-level to jail...
Think Napoleon, not executed, but (finally) exiled to St. Helena.
You're right: "...some people are simply too high-level to jail"
A lot of that decision not to have children is from the men just as much as the women. We measure the number of children per woman as a statistic, because it's (ahem) easier to keep track of. But that's nowhere near the whole story, and it smacks of blaming women more than they deserve.
It's concerning that the trend against having children is so strong. A lot of people get caught up in cultural trends, and if they don't have a balancing influence, such as a big Italian or Irish family with a whole lot of children, they have no idea what they're missing.
I've been working with K-1 children this year and they're so delightful.
Italy is one of the countries with the lowest birthrates the last three decades. Italian children do not only have no siblings, they have no aunts, uncles, or cousins.
Think about that.