Saturday morning links

Quicksearch

Blog Administration

Open login screen

RSS Readers

Saturday, August 27. 2022

Let Djokovic Play

'Trans-masculine' parents of 10-year-old 'trans model' plan for minor's gender surgeries at age 16

Georgetown University imposes mask mandates this fall, against CDC guidelines

Liberal Arts:

According to the course description for “Mental Health, Madness, and Neuroqueerness,” the class will, “critically examine how ideas about mental health and wellness are situated in systems of colonialism, white supremacy, capitalism, and patriarchy.”

Cornell is evil: Cornell perpetuates ‘colonialism, slavery, racism, classism, sexism, transphobia, homophobia, ableism,’ school’s website states

Whiteboards are racist because 'they collaborate with white organizational culture'

Spectator: Nikole Hannah-Jones has taken over the history profession. A professor strays from the woke line and gets slammed

College: Free is Free, Before or After the Fact; Yet, There is No Such Thing As Free

Hard-Working Plumber Looking Forward To Paying For His Neighbor’s Gender Studies Degree

Penn-Wharton pegs Biden's Academia bailout potential cost at $1 trillion

Big Tech Gears Up To Throw The Midterm Elections

We Now Know The Perfect Temperature For Your Home, Which Is Bad For ‘Climate Change’

Kathy Hochul’s call for 5.4M Republicans to leave New York is dangerous and disgusting

Mark Zuckerberg Tells Joe Rogan The FBI Told Him To Censor Hunter Biden Story…

Whistleblowers: FBI Leadership Told Agents ‘You Will Not Look at That Hunter Biden Laptop’

With a stroke of his pen before the midterms, Biden forgives $300 billion in student debt, without a care for the dutiful who paid their loans off or those who did not go to college but will now pay for those that did.

Anybody who imagines that the Jan 6th protest was an attempted coup is crazy

Europe Is Now "Powerless" And Its Inflation And Recession Are About To Get Even More Brutal

Posted by Bird Dog in Hot News & Misc. Short Subjects at 08:26 | Comments (64) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

Time to set up a fund for Republicans to leave NY on Give, Send, Go or some other non woke crowd funding structure. Let us see how NY does without the people who keep the lights on. The buses Abbott is using to take illegals to NYC can run both ways.

#1 John Fisher on 2022-08-27 09:33 (Reply)

Kathy Hochul’s comments are out of the new Democrat playbook. They intend to divide and conquer and to divide you need to create enemies, someone for your minions to hate. I expect to see a lot more of this between now and November. If you read those sites that cater to the left you will see a lot of hatred. Literally wishing conservative dead and cheering any misfortune of anyone who is not a radical lefty. I have seen "glee" when conservatives died from covid and worse. The left's base seems steeped in this hatred to the extent that it could all be prosecuted as hate speech (if the hate speech laws applied to the left).

#1.1 OneGuy on 2022-08-27 09:59 (Reply)

The White House officially is now calling Republicans fascists. What bothers me most about this is that Democrats have for 50-60 years adopted the communist tactic of labeling their opponents with the acts and crimes that they themselves commit. In other words the Democrats have shown their cards and now they are acting fascist and feel the need to get out in front of the name calling by saying that Republicans are fascists.

Our own Bagdad Bob, also known as "Karine Jean-Pierre" has said "You look at the definition of fascism...". Well, what is the definition of fascism (before the MSM and other lefties redefined it) "an authoritarian and nationalistic socialist system of government and social organization, where government forces compliance using militarized police tactics." This is virtually a perfect description of our current Democrat administration and congress. So who are the fascists?

#2 JustMe on 2022-08-27 10:20 (Reply)

JustMe: "an authoritarian and nationalistic socialist system of government"

Try to find that quote somewhere. Fascism is no more socialist than the military where everybody gets fed. Fascism is opposed to Marxism or to any international egalitarian movements.

Britannica: "Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the good of the nation and race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy."

#2.1 Zachriel on 2022-08-27 10:43 (Reply)

Well now (((Quibble-DickZ))) just defined the Brandon administration.
Well done kiddiez.

#2.1.1 Zachinoff on 2022-08-27 10:51 (Reply)

I knew I could depend on you to prove me correct that the definition of fascism has been rewritten by liberals/fascists.

#2.1.2 JustMe on 2022-08-27 11:03 (Reply)

JustMe: I knew I could depend on you to prove me correct that the definition of fascism has been rewritten by liberals/fascists.

Gee, golly whiz.

"Granted that the 19th century was the century of socialism, liberalism, democracy, this does not mean that the 20th century must also be the century of socialism, liberalism, democracy. Political doctrines pass; nations remain. We are free to believe that this is the century of authority, a century tending to the 'right', a Fascist century. If the 19th century were the century of the individual (liberalism implies individualism) we are free to believe that this is the 'collective' century, and therefore the century of the State." — Benito Mussolini, 1932

Fascism has more than one expression, but all of them entail extreme hierarchy (meaning on the political right), authoritarianism, ultranationalism (defined by ethnicity), and the exaltation of violent conflict as giving meaning to national existence.

#2.1.2.1 Zachriel on 2022-08-27 11:16 (Reply)

Oh, now fascism means something else.

Thanks for that clarification, (((Quibble-DickZ))).

Love it when they step on their own dickz.

#2.1.2.1.1 Zachinoff on 2022-08-27 11:24 (Reply)

Fascism was simply a version of socialism. Classical socialism was where the government took over all means of production. But the government always screwed it up. Fascism was a socialist agenda designed to fix that flaw and it left production and private business in the hands of the businessmen who were best able to run the company. But it instituted an authoritarian government control with mandates to direct exactly what the companies and producers did and it created a militarized government law enforcement unit (like Obama did with the FBI) to enforce those mandates.

It was never "right wing" any more than the Nazi's were right wing. Socialism, fascism and communism are all left wing versions of the same thing with varying degrees of military style kinetic enforcement. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/aoc-backed-new-york-democrat-celebrates-primary-victory-declaring-socialism-wins

#2.1.2.1.2 JustMe on 2022-08-27 12:05 (Reply)

Keep digging. Your hero’s can’t even define what a women is.

#2.1.2.1.3 B. Hammer on 2022-08-27 12:14 (Reply)

JustMe: Fascism was simply a version of socialism.

Fascism opposed socialism. Unlike socialism, fascism is not an economic philosophy, but used different economic models depending on what advanced their interests. Fascism is no more socialist than a military where everyone gets fed.

JustMe: It was never "right wing" any more than the Nazi's were right wing.

Nearly all scholars have treated Nazism as right wing, then and now. Nearly all laypersons have treated Nazism as right wing, then and now. Fascists garnered their primary support from the political right, and opposed the egalitarianism of the political left, whether moderate liberalism or extreme communism. Nowadays, Neonazis are considered to be on the political right.

#2.1.2.1.4 Zachriel on 2022-08-27 12:21 (Reply)

"Fascism opposed socialism."

You are partially right for the wrong reason. The fascists opposed socialism because they thought that the fascist version of socialism was better.

"Nearly all scholars have treated Nazism as right wing"

Again, almost correct. What you meant to say was that in an effort to coverup their incredibly stupid ideology that nearly all left wing scholars declared Nazism was right wing. I can't really blame them anymore than I blame the Democrat/communists today from fearing Trump.

#2.1.2.1.4.1 JustMe on 2022-08-27 15:22 (Reply)

JustMe: The fascists opposed socialism because they thought that the fascist version of socialism was better.

There's just no way to spin it. Socialism is an egalitarian economic theory. Fascists are not egalitarian, but advocate a strictly hierarchical and ultra-ethnonationalist society.

JustMe: Again, almost correct.

As they advocate a strictly hierarchical society, fascists are (far) right-wing by definition. Communists advocate a perfectly egalitarian society, so are (far) left-wing by definition.

#2.1.2.1.4.1.1 Zachriel on 2022-08-27 15:32 (Reply)

Fascists and Marxists are authoritarian governors while anarchists want no government.

Far right and far left are seating arrangements in French parliament since their "enlightenment". They are ALL authoritarian socialists whether national or international. Do you want a Mitterrand or a Macron?

Antifa was simply the Communist party in Germany that lost to the Nazi fascists. Antifa was the muscle while the Frankfort School elites were the critical theory designers. The Frankfort School moved to the US. (Columbia) Now we suffer the fools of Antifa as well.

#2.1.3 indyjonesouthere on 2022-08-27 11:38 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: Fascists and Marxists are authoritarian governors while anarchists want no government.

Fascists are authoritarian by nature. Marxists believe the state will wither away.

indyjonesouthere: They are ALL authoritarian socialists whether national or international.

Republicans and Constitutional Monarchists comprised the political left in the National Assembly. The political right supported the monarchy, which was authoritarian by nature.

#2.1.3.1 Zachriel on 2022-08-27 11:48 (Reply)

The state will wither away... What have you been sipping on this morning. You never seem to understand the difference between theory and reality.

Once again... Mitterrand or Macron?

#2.1.3.1.1 indyjonesouthere on 2022-08-27 12:00 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: You never seem to understand the difference between theory and reality.

We're quite aware of the difference. The idea of violent ethnonational conflict and an absolutely hierarchical society (far political right) didn't work out for the fascists either, but that was what they believed. Marxists believe that the state will wither away leaving a perfectly egalitarian society (far political left). Fascists and Marxists have very different beliefs.

#2.1.3.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2022-08-27 12:09 (Reply)

Wrong. They are authoritarian to the core. Franco's Spain, Hitlers Germany, Mussolini's Italy or the Vichy french are no different than Marxist Russia with Lenin/Trotsky/Stalin, Marxist China with Mao, or Marxist Cambodia with Pol Pot or Castro's Cuba. They were ALL authoritarian, and they were ALL pretenders of democracy.

#2.1.3.1.1.1.1 indyjonesouthere on 2022-08-27 12:35 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: Wrong. {Marxists} are authoritarian to the core

Marxists believe in an intermediate stage of social development, the dictatorship of the proletariat. After class divisions have been eliminated, the state is supposed to wither away. Eventually, after communism has spread globally, the causes of war will disappear. Of course, this has never happened, but that is what they believe. Fascists believe in ethnonational conflict as giving meaning to the nation. They want to subjugate or destroy other nations, not liberate them. You are confusing ends and means:

Marxists: dictatorship of the proletariat is the means to an egalitarian future.
Fascists: dictatorship under a single leader and a strict social and ethnic hierarchy is the means and the ends.

The left-right spectrum is defined by goals. The left advocates greater equality, the right advocates for hierarchy. The terms, as you note, originated in the French revolutionary period. The monarchists were on the right and supported the existing authoritarian and hierarchical aristocratic structure. The left advocated for varying degrees of social and political equality.

#2.1.3.1.1.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2022-08-27 12:57 (Reply)

You simply cannot deal with the real world examples. You have to be a social science academic to ignore reality. None of the theory you spout is even remotely connected to the practice. Each and every example I gave you leads to nothing BUT authoritarian government. There is not, nor has there ever been, a Marxist communist entity that was not authoritarian and remained authoritarian until it's demise.

Much of this is like the AGM global cooling, global warming, climate change or whatever todays term may be. They are academic religious beliefs. The Frankfort School is a perfect example of Marxist critical theory spreading throughout academia as a religion. And reality is ignored as it is deathly inconvenient.

#2.1.3.1.1.1.1.1.1 indyjonesouthere on 2022-08-27 13:18 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: You simply cannot deal with the real world examples.

You cited two examples; fascists and Marxists. Both have real world examples, both are failed views, and we addressed both. They are very different philosophies, especially their views on egalitarianism.

indyjonesouthere: None of the theory you spout is even remotely connected to the practice.

YOU brought up "Marxism," which is a very specific philosophy of social development, albeit, fatally flawed. Again, you conflate means and ends.

i: "Nazi Germany used tanks. Americans used tanks. They're just the same."
z: No, they have very different goals, even though they used similar means.

#2.1.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2022-08-27 14:01 (Reply)

You can sell that theory in academia to unsuspecting student but it never sells in the functioning world.

During WWII, most soldiers would as soon let the German fascists and Russian communists destroy each other. We would volunteer to bury all of them.

Only a utopian would think either authoritarian system would be worth living under.

#2.1.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1 indyjonesouthere on 2022-08-27 21:16 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: You can sell that theory in academia to unsuspecting student

Huh? Millions of people believed in Marxism, not because it was authoritarian, but because they believed it would lead to a less authoritarian, more equal world.

Fascism is authoritarian by nature, and millions believed in fascism because they believed a strong leader and a regimented society would lead to ethnonational renewal, a destruction of their supposed enemies, and a better world for the people of the ethnonation.

#2.1.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2022-08-28 08:44 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: Wrong.

Let try this. Why do we say the French monarchists were on the political right, while the republicans were on the political left?

#2.1.3.1.1.1.1.2 Zachriel on 2022-08-27 13:02 (Reply)

Because you are attempting to differentiate between authoritarian marxist socialists and authoritarian fascist socialists and their is NO difference between them other than who owns the goods or who controls the goods.

#2.1.3.1.1.1.1.2.1 indyjonesouthere on 2022-08-27 13:26 (Reply)

Z: Why do we say the French monarchists were on the political right, while the republicans were on the political left?

indyjonesouthere: Because you are attempting to differentiate between authoritarian marxist socialists and authoritarian fascist socialists and their is NO difference between them other than who owns the goods or who controls the goods.

There were no Marxists or fascists in the time of the French Revolution. Your confusion would be resolved if you grappled with the question. Concerning the French Revolution, why are authoritarian monarchists considered to be on the political right, while republicans are considered to be on the political left? (Clue: the left-right dichotomy is not synonymous with the authoritarian-libertarian spectrum.)

#2.1.3.1.1.1.1.2.1.1 Zachriel on 2022-08-27 14:04 (Reply)

You are severely confused if you think marxist and fascist ideas did not exist for thousands of years. That the ideas were only put to pen and ink as of late makes little difference as to their existence.
That is not authoritarian vs libertarian. Even libertarians expect some smaller amount of government. Anarchist want no government.

There is nothing like liberal fascism.
https://www.americanthinker.com'blog/2020/10/crying_fascist-html

#2.1.3.1.1.1.1.2.1.1.1 indyjonesouthere on 2022-08-27 14:50 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: You are severely confused if you think marxist and fascist ideas did not exist for thousands of years.

Fascism can't exist before the concept of the nation-state and the rise of nationalism. Marxism can't exist before the concept of social progress and the industrial revolution.

indyjonesouthere: There is nothing like liberal fascism.

That's when a segment of the American right started the redefinition of left and right. But there are authoritarians on the left and authoritarians on the right; just as there are libertarians on the left and libertarians on the right. The left-right (egalitarian-hierarchical) spectrum is orthogonal to the authoritarian-libertarian spectrum.

#2.1.3.1.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2022-08-27 15:26 (Reply)

I will fundamentally transform America. Ring a bell?

Who fundamentally transformed Russia, or China, or Cuba, or Germany, or Spain, or Italy.

The left/right dichotomy was created by the liberals to avoid their own embarrassment. They needed a foil... you need a foil.

#2.1.3.1.1.1.1.2.1.1.2 indyjonesouthere on 2022-08-27 15:32 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: The left/right dichotomy was created by the liberals to avoid their own embarrassment.

The left-right spectrum dates from the 18th century. Again, why is the authoritarian French monarchy considered to be on the political right, while the republicans are considered to be on the political left? When you grapple with that question, it may lead to a better grasp of the concept.

#2.1.3.1.1.1.1.2.1.1.2.1 Zachriel on 2022-08-27 15:38 (Reply)

You need to grapple with reality which is a concept that libs have a tough time accepting. You created left/right and you are both. Do you prefer fascist politicians or communist politicians. I prefer neither. Good luck surviving your pick. You will own nothing and be happy.

#2.1.3.1.1.1.1.2.1.1.2.1.1 indyjonesouthere on 2022-08-27 15:46 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: You created left/right and you are both.

The left-right political dichotomy originated in 18th century revolutionary France.

indyjonesouthere: Do you prefer fascist politicians or communist politicians.

We reject extremism on the left and the right.

Notably, you didn't answer the question.

#2.1.3.1.1.1.1.2.1.1.2.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2022-08-27 20:46 (Reply)

Notably you won't pick Mitterrand or Macron. That isn't theory.

#2.1.3.1.1.1.1.2.1.1.2.1.1.1.1 indyjonesouthere on 2022-08-28 09:47 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: Notably you won't pick Mitterrand or Macron.

Pick them for what?

#2.1.3.1.1.1.1.2.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2022-08-28 10:08 (Reply)

We're not very fond of either. Mitterrand nationalized industries, which caused economic problems, but also instituted some reforms, and effectively sidelined the Communist Party. Macron appears to be trying to find a "Third Way," avoiding the extremes of left and right. The disadvantage of such an approach is that larger problems are often left unaddressed.

#2.1.3.1.1.1.1.2.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.2 Zachriel on 2022-08-28 10:38 (Reply)

Socialist, nationalist, right-wing, left-wing---what a friggin' smokescreen. Why not get your definition from that Ur-Facsist himself, Benito Mussolini?

All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.

Whether the state captures the capitalists, or the capitalists capture the state, it will be Fascism all the same.

#2.2 Mike Anderson (Link) on 2022-08-27 16:09 (Reply)

The government has no business in student loans. However, I could accept a compromise where the government ends all loans and grants and other free stuff for college and instead has a single very focused program that pays for the college (after successful completion) of science and engineering students (maybe medical too). AND that we end all H1B and other programs that allow foreigners to take our jobs and remove all of those currently here under those programs. We need those kinds of graduates to compete in the world marketplace and we do not need more race studies and basket weaving degrees.

#3 IdahoBob on 2022-08-27 10:32 (Reply)

QUOTE:

Anybody who imagines that the Jan 6th protest was an attempted coup is crazy

Two people have already pleaded guilty to insurrection. Others have been charged and are awaiting trial. The storming of the Capitol was after months of attacks on the democratic process itself. The mob demanded Congress stop the electoral vote count.

#4 Zachriel on 2022-08-27 10:36 (Reply)

Who opened the doors to the Capitol?

A mystery huh, (((Quibble-DickZ)))?

#4.1 Zachinoff on 2022-08-27 10:54 (Reply)

Nobody has been charged with insurrection, let alone convicted of it or pled guilty to it. So far, 185 cases have concluded (out of about 840 arrested)... only 80 of those were given at least some jail time; the median sentence was 45 days, and the longest has been 67 months. So based on the public record so far, there's not a lot of there there, as the saying goes.

#4.2 Janet on 2022-08-27 12:36 (Reply)

Janet: Nobody has been charged with insurrection, let alone convicted of it or pled guilty to it.

Sorry. Two have pleaded guilty to seditious conspiracy, a more serious crime than insurrection under federal law. Eleven have been charged, including the two who pleaded guilty.
https://www.npr.org/2022/04/29/1095538077/a-second-oath-keeper-pleaded-guilty-to-seditious-conspiracy-in-the-jan-6-riot

#4.2.1 Zachriel on 2022-08-27 12:46 (Reply)

Hard to say which is "worse" under federal law-- they're both felonies, as I understand; an odd quirk of law that armed insurrection has a maximum sentence of 10 years, whereas seditious conspiracy has a maximum of 20 years, but in practice, these people will probably also end up with a sentence of 5-7 years.

Even so... I have a very hard time seeing an existential threat to the Republic from a gaggle of guys who dressed up in some "tacti-cool" gear and rode a golf cart to the Capitol, and walked away after the first face full of pepper spray. They talked a lot of **** among themselves about bringing weapons, but ultimately nobody did. I think they should face the court about their actions, but insurrection? Come on.

#4.2.1.1 Janet on 2022-08-28 09:09 (Reply)

Janet: I have a very hard time seeing an existential threat to the Republic from a gaggle of guys who dressed up in some "tacti-cool" gear and rode a golf cart to the Capitol, and walked away after the first face full of pepper spray.

Stupid seditious conspiracy is still seditious conspiracy. A mob threatening to hang the Vice President was only feet and moments away from the Vice President. To his credit, Pence refused to leave the Capitol fearing that the electoral count process would be stopped.

Janet: They talked a lot of **** among themselves about bringing weapons, but ultimately nobody did.

Not sure where you are getting your information, but a lot of people have already pleaded guilty to having weapons during the riot.

Indiana Man Pleads Guilty to Carrying a Gun and Assaulting Law Enforcement Officers in Jan. 6 Capitol Breach

Most heavily armed January 6 rioter pleads guilty to bringing five firearms and 11 Molotov cocktails to Capitol

And guns are not the only weapon involved in the Capitol riot. Hitting police with an American flag pole comes to mind.

#4.2.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2022-08-28 09:31 (Reply)

"Anybody who imagines that the Jan 6th protest was an attempted coup is crazy

Two people have already pleaded guilty to insurrection. Others have been charged and are awaiting trial. The storming of the Capitol was after months of attacks on the democratic process itself. The mob demanded Congress stop the electoral vote count."

Therefore, Zachriel is crazy! At least that's a protected class these days, so there's that.

#4.3 Eeyore on 2022-08-27 15:03 (Reply)

Let Djokovic Play: "The credibility and legitimacy of public health demands two things. The rules have to make sense; they can’t be nakedly contradictory. And the rules have to benefit people. You can’t demand jumping through hoops merely for optics."

Back from 2022 re-write: "The credibility and legitimacy of public health demands two things. Power and Authority. Frequent displays of these are important. You can demand jumping through hoops merely for optics."

#5 Aggie on 2022-08-27 10:41 (Reply)

I can’t be the only one that wonders what sort of society can possibly be built on the foundation of Neuroqueerness? They seem to invent new words for madness every single month. And now I have to pay for it, with the stroke of the tyrants pen.

Where is the opposition party? Well, the minority leader of the Senate, is busy bashing the candidates running in various states, as not being fit to hold the office of Senator. Has McConnell ever said the same of the democrats? Did he confront Chuck Schumer over his speech rallying the democrat base to violence against a Supreme Court Justice? “I want to tell you Gorsuch,” Schumer said, video from the event shows, “and I want to tell you Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price.” “You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions,” he added. Not that I know of. That sort of talk is perfect, when spoken against republicans.

#6 B. Hammer on 2022-08-27 10:41 (Reply)

Clearly it is quite difficult to see which side Mitch McConnell is rooting for sometimes. Just like backing Murkowski in Alaska when she votes against the Republicans much of the time. Get rid of him.

#6.1 JC on 2022-08-27 15:35 (Reply)

California has said that all new gasoline powered cars will be banned in 2035. It is pure stupidity. Anyone familiar with both the ICE (Internal combustion engine) and the electric alternatives can tell you that the ICE vehicles are twice as environmentally friendly as the electric versions. All of the earth friendly energy alternatives (solar, wind, EVs) are in fact the worst choices possible and are not sustainable. They only exist because of massive government subsidies. Now, I accept the fact that our smartest people do not become politicians and attain leadership, but I doubt that all politicians are so stupid that they don't know this. I.E that it is literally impossible to replace all gas powered cars with EV's and the grid won't support it the people can't afford it and there isn't enough of the essential raw materials to make these vehicles, etc. They know this at some level... So why the mandates? The answer is as simple as the subsidies. Imagine the power if you as a state or federal legislator can direct those billions and trillions in subsidies to favored companies. What would be the benefits that those legislators would then accrue from these multi-billion dollar international companies? THAT, right there is 100% the reason we are funding and mandating these unsustainable policies. In the end it won't work and it will destroy our economy and our middle class.

#7 Retired Engineer on 2022-08-27 11:17 (Reply)

Well put, R.E.

#7.1 Zachinoff on 2022-08-27 11:37 (Reply)

The political intent of mandating all vehicles be EV's is that they know dam well that they cannot build enough electricity production by that time nor can enough EV's be built by that time. The entire intent is to get rid of personal transportation.

The democratic socialists are statists. They always preferred the peons be relegated to trains, streetcars, buses or any other form of mass conveyance. Personal transportation is for their use only.

#7.2 indyjonesouthere on 2022-08-27 11:50 (Reply)

"The entire intent is to get rid of personal transportation."

This is the goal. Anybody want to guess why the Left prefers that it remain unsaid?

#7.2.1 Not Sure on 2022-08-27 17:35 (Reply)

I believe that the opportunity for graft is a side benefit of destroying our mobility.

#7.3 John Fisher on 2022-08-27 12:48 (Reply)

70??? Do these people live in Canada? The perfect temperature for the thermostat in my house is 83 daytime and 80 at night during the summer, and 65/60 in the winter. And that's only because the windows on my rental house are screwed shut so I can't just open them and turn on some fans. That's the minimum electric bill that keeps the house reasonably livable (particularly with generous use of fans or blankets as needed).

For air conditioning, even running fullblast all the time, the A/C unit can only reasonably make the house 20 degrees (F) cooler than the outdoor temp-- so when you're getting up to 105 outside in the summer, 70 in the house isn't even possible unless you're running some kind of souped-up, turbocharged HVAC unit, adding in a few window units that keep tripping your circuit breaker, and paying a $500/mo electric bill.

Also, if I was rich and I didn't have to choose between economizing on the electric bill and buying groceries, 70 in our subtropic summer would still be insane. When you set it that low, everybody acclimates to it, and then nobody can tolerate being outside anymore. Since I want my kids to play outside, there's no benefit acclimating them to Penobscot Bay when they live on the Gulf of Mexico.

Also also, our HVAC system is really, unpleasantly LOUD. Can't hear each other talk when it's running. So the less it has to run the better.

That article was written by marshmallows.

#8 Churchmouse on 2022-08-27 12:47 (Reply)

I wish regular posters would stop responding to Zach. He just trashes up every thread he participates in. Haven't you ever heard the phrase "Don't feed the trolls?"

#9 snopercod on 2022-08-27 14:40 (Reply)

The university social sciences are full of professor trolls that rarely get feedback. They need feedback in order to be at least partially grounded in the real world rather than the world of "theory".

#9.1 indyjonesouthere on 2022-08-27 15:58 (Reply)

When you see a post count of 50, you can be sure he/she/it is here vomiting up all manner of idiocy.

#9.2 Not Sure on 2022-08-27 17:39 (Reply)

Yep, when I see a post count like that I know the turd is back in the punchbowl, and I'll be scrolling past most of the noise.

#9.2.1 Nonns Mouse on 2022-08-27 18:12 (Reply)

So two trans parents have a child who turns out to be trans as well? What are the odds! Munchausen by proxy. Otherwise known as child abuse.

#10 Jerryskids on 2022-08-27 14:48 (Reply)

Indeed. The kid's like a cat whose owner claims it likes being vegetarian. You know who is making that choice.

#10.1 Nonna Mouse on 2022-08-27 18:14 (Reply)

So Greece, Rome, or Sparta don't ring a bell? Authoritarians are the ideal model for fascist and marxist. Neither would survive without practicing authoritarianism. And neither have ever advanced beyond the need for the force of authoritarianism. Your theory is liberal BS. Try living in the real world.

#11 indyjonesouthere on 2022-08-27 15:38 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: So Greece, Rome, or Sparta don't ring a bell? Authoritarians are the ideal model for fascist and marxist.

None of those believed that social evolution would lead to the state withering away, as Marx believed. Nor were they a model that Marx would consider something to strive for. Fascists, on the other hand, had an idealized view of those societies, but that doesn't make Leonides a fascist.

#11.1 Zachriel on 2022-08-27 15:43 (Reply)

Nobody in the real world believes a state will "wither away". Well, maybe an academic like Marx.
States commit suicide, usually economic suicide.

#11.1.1 indyjonesouthere on 2022-08-27 16:02 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: Nobody in the real world believes a state will "wither away".

In fact, millions of people fervently believed in Marxism. But when an unrealizable ideal (utopianism) combines with a belief that the ends justify the means (extremism), it can lead to untold misery.

#11.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2022-08-27 20:43 (Reply)

That fervent belief could pass as religion... and for marxist it was a religion. Until it killed them.

#11.1.1.1.1 indyjonesouthere on 2022-08-27 21:20 (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

Saturday, August 27. 2022

Saturday morning links