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.
37:1 The hand of the LORD came upon me, and he brought me out by the spirit of the LORD and set me down in the middle of a valley; it was full of bones.
37:2 He led me all around them; there were very many lying in the valley, and they were very dry.
37:3 He said to me, "Mortal, can these bones live?" I answered, "O Lord GOD, you know."
37:4 Then he said to me, "Prophesy to these bones, and say to them: O dry bones, hear the word of the LORD.
37:5 Thus says the Lord GOD to these bones: I will cause breath to enter you, and you shall live.
37:6 I will lay sinews on you, and will cause flesh to come upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and you shall live; and you shall know that I am the LORD."
37:7 So I prophesied as I had been commanded; and as I prophesied, suddenly there was a noise, a rattling, and the bones came together, bone to its bone.
37:8 I looked, and there were sinews on them, and flesh had come upon them, and skin had covered them; but there was no breath in them.
37:9 Then he said to me, "Prophesy to the breath, prophesy, mortal, and say to the breath: Thus says the Lord GOD: Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live."
37:10 I prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived, and stood on their feet, a vast multitude.
37:11 Then he said to me, "Mortal, these bones are the whole house of Israel. They say, 'Our bones are dried up, and our hope is lost; we are cut off completely.'
37:12 Therefore prophesy, and say to them, Thus says the Lord GOD: I am going to open your graves, and bring you up from your graves, O my people; and I will bring you back to the land of Israel.
37:13 And you shall know that I am the LORD, when I open your graves, and bring you up from your graves, O my people.
37:14 I will put my spirit within you, and you shall live, and I will place you on your own soil; then you shall know that I, the LORD, have spoken and will act," says the LORD.
Why should they be treated any differently? It boggles the mind. As Taranto notes:
That resolves the conundrum we noted atop this column. Fringe political speech like flag burning, funeral protests and Nazi parades is so broadly unappealing as to have no effect on "the will of the people." The same is true of nonpolitical forms of expression such as pornography, violent video games and depictions of animal cruelty. (Breyer's willingness to countenance restrictions of the first two has to do with the protection of children, not of the body politic.)
Only mainstream political expression has the potential to thwart the "collective" will, and thus, in the view of Breyer and his fellow dissenters, it alone is deserving of restriction on such a rationale. That stands the First Amendment on its head. Its purpose may be to "make government responsive," as Wilson argued, but the means by which it does so is the limitation of government power and protection of individual freedom.
So only political speech requires adult restrictions? Not commercial speech, not speech of the press and the MSM, not porn, not commercial advertising, just political speech of individuals?
Why not limit those Viagra ad budgets, for the children of course.
Even if this is all un-American and strange, it seems hardly partisan since the very wealthy tend to support the Leftist control freaks. What's up with all of this? And what the heck is "the collective will"? There is no collective will except nominally and only in totalitarian states.
Let's face it: When politics and government are too important, freedom is in trouble.
The curfew tolls the knell of parting day, The lowing herd winds slowly o'er the lea, The ploughman homeward plods his weary way, And leaves the world to darkness and to me.
Now fades the glimmering landscape on the sight, And all the air a solemn stillness holds, Save where the beetle wheels his droning flight, And drowsy tinklings lull the distant folds:
Save that from yonder ivy-mantled tower The moping owl does to the moon complain Of such as, wandering near her secret bower, Molest her ancient solitary reign.
Beneath those rugged elms, that yew-tree's shade, Where heaves the turf in many a mouldering heap, Each in his narrow cell for ever laid, The rude Forefathers of the hamlet sleep.
The breezy call of incense-breathing morn, The swallow twittering from the straw-built shed, The cock's shrill clarion, or the echoing horn, No more shall rouse them from their lowly bed.
For them no more the blazing hearth shall burn, Or busy housewife ply her evening care: No children run to lisp their sire's return, Or climb his knees the envied kiss to share,
Oft did the harvest to their sickle yield, Their furrow oft the stubborn glebe has broke; How jocund did they drive their team afield! How bow'd the woods beneath their sturdy stroke!
The rest of the poem is below the fold. Dalrymple recently discussed Grey: Fifty Shades of Grey)
We did inheritances yesterday, so it seems fitting to review gift taxes today.
My impression is that gift taxes are largely dodged in the US today, unless they involve bank transfers of assets, or deeds. It is certainly not unusual for older folks to hand over jewelry, gold coins, artwork, etc. to their kids.
I do not understand why gift taxes exist in the US, but I am confident that readers can provide me with the rationale.
The CEO of Mozilla, Brendan Eich, was forced to step down over a personal belief. This is what our country is coming to. You can't have a belief if it is not in line with that which is approved by the shrieking masses.
It's worth noting his donation has been known about since 2008. It's also worth noting Eich penned a blog post about his donation and how it did not conflict with his position, that his role as CEO was to pursue Mozilla's goals regardless of whether employees agreed with his personal views or not.
This is not enough anymore. As this author notes, your views are meaningful and can play a role in what happens to you. Should they? If I disagree with much of what Donna Shalala supports, should I prevent my child from attending her university even if it's the best place for him to go?
I don't agree with most of Zuckerberg or Gates' political views. I still use their products. I fail to see what led to Eich's ouster. They hired him knowing his views, they may have expected a backlash, but felt they could deal with it. They should have.
I opposed gay marriage legislation, too. Admittedly, for wholly different reasons, since I think gay people have the right to be as miserable as the rest of us married folk. I opposed it because I just don't think government is the proper guarantor of contract, or grantor of right, of marriage. Were Martha and George Washington married? As far as I can tell they were, though not necessarily, because the US government didn't exist when they got married. In fact, government involvement in marriage was originally designed as an exclusionary tool, not an inclusive one. The earliest laws were designed to prevent miscegenation. The easiest way to avoid the discussion is to simply say government shouldn't have passed any laws preventing people who consent to marriage from entering that contract. Since I opposed gay marriage legislation, could I suffer the same fate as Eich? Quite possibly, in our intolerant society, I could, because I don't support laws giving special exceptions to existing laws, I just want to do away with those laws altogether.
Personal views are personal views, and as long as Eich was cognizant of his long-term goals as CEO, and didn't let his personal views impact his treatment or management of people within the organization, then he should have been kept on. Otherwise, his removal is an act of cowardice and shame.
...leading Progressive defenses of freedom of expression, such as Zechariah Chafee’s, relied on utilitarian considerations and not on freedom of expression as a fundamental individual right. Progressives identified freedom of speech as a civil liberty to differentiate it from what Progressive understood to be the obsolete, individualist, natural-rights based liberties of the American past. While activist government was inimical to such rights as liberty of contract and property rights, it arguably buttressed a Progressive case for freedom of speech. According to Progressive advocates of constitutional protection for freedom of expression, the more active a role played by government, the more important it is to ensure that public policy is subject to vigorous and uninhibited debate. Such debate not only could bring important considerations to light, but also could serve as a check on those who would use public power for private gain, which in turn would lead to better public policy, which in turn would create a welcome demand for even more government.
Freedom is not utilitarian, and not meant to be. Freedom is, by nature, messy, difficult, and contentious. Furthermore, freedom is not meant to help government, or to help anything in particular other than the human spirit. If anything, freedom is meant to be against government power. Where is Breyer coming from?
America is not a government. America is a bunch of individual people. Who bankrolled Tom Paine's writings? The wealthy Tom Jefferson did, as I recall, out of his own fat pocketbook.
Yes, the 1st Amendment lives to fight another day. Maybe New York was right to insist on the Bill of Rights. Should never have been necessary, though. The fascists and statists hate it.
Every comment I have read or heard about this terrible incident is ignorant beyond belief.
In fact, all too ignorant and stupid for me to respond to. This time, I have neither the time nor the inclination. It's tragic, unavoidable. There is no perfect safety from either nature or from human nature, and any perfect safety would be a living death.
I am strongly opposed to death taxes of any sort. Those monies have already been taxed, and they belong to your estate which is really just a legal extension of you. You could have spent your assets when alive, but chose to conserve them. Saving is supposed to be a virtue.
(I am also opposed to gift taxes which limit how much one can give to a family member, or anyone else, without a tax penalty, but that's another topic.)
I do understand that the greedy government wants any money it can get, from any source, and I also understand that estate planning for the wealthy employs thousands of attorneys and accountants who might otherwise have little to do.
What's wrong with the idea that, over time and over generations, there would be the freedom for families to accumulate assets for the benefit of their present and future kin? The more, the better. Financial independence to some degree can be either a blessing or a curse, but, contra Teddy Roosevelt, that's not government's proper concern. I have seen family businesses, farms, and family vacation places destroyed by estate taxes, and it seems wrong to me.
Here are my poll questions - assuming you and spouse have died:
1. Do you want to leave any assets to your kids, grandkids, relatives, friends, or do you want to die broke?
2. What % of your estate would you wish to give to charities?
3. If you have one prosperous kid and two middle class or poor kids, would you write your will differently for them?
The Kochs are needed to counterbalance Soros. If you want to do character assassination, Soros is a Jewish Nazi collaborator, a market manipulator, and a convicted felon. How's that for starters?
Official
Policy: Male Federal Workers Can Use Women's Restrooms, Locker Rooms -
See more at:
http://cnsnews.com/commentary/terence-p-jeffrey/official-policy-male-federal-workers-can-use-womens-restrooms-locker#sthash.FjcOgjgH.dpufKoch: I'm Fighting to Restore a Free Society - Instead of welcoming free debate, collectivists engage in character assassination.The Kochs are needed to counterbalance Soros
I think Frank Gehry's stuff is terrible, narcissistic, and annoying, but he is an interesting showman - and his stuff sells. He shoulda been a sculptor or something.
As we have pointed out here, there is far more white poverty than black poverty in the US. It's not about skin tone.
Truth is, poverty is not a unitary phenomenon, and it's not all a problem. There are hundreds of sorts of poverty: poverty by life-style choice, poverty by location choice, poverty by bad luck, poverty by illness, mental illness, and addiction, poverty by personality traits or weak character, poverty from long-term unemployment, temporary poverty, poverty from being in grad school, poverty from being improvident, new immigrant poverty, poverty from having been in jail, poverty from being embedded in a poverty culture, poverty from trying to live on Social Security, poverty from being a single parent (a life-style choice, I suppose), fraudulent poverty from cash businesses and illegal activities, and so forth. It's not all a collective "societal problem."
Why don't the pundits talk about that? They never do. Even Charles Murray doesn't. I'd like to see a statistical break-down, but it doesn't exist. Worse yet, poverty stats fail to include government or charitable benefits so I am skeptical about all of it.
America offers great freebies even for those for whom poverty is a life-style choice because we do not let people starve in the streets, without shelter. Need a cell phone? We even have Obamaphones. America is a great country in which to be poor.
Lawns are not natural, and they are a pain in the ass. However, they are needed for kid play, croquet, and summer cocktail parties. They can also look gracious and neat, when healthy and when surrounded by good plantings.They are really just one sort of garden, or part of a garden.Grassy garden paths are fine things.
Around here, most years you can overseed a thin lawn area in April (although the best time is early Fall). When I overseed an area in Spring, I follow it by raking in a thin top-dressing of my own concoction - a mix of sand, compost, rotted manure, a little peat moss.
What about crabgrass prevention? Crabgrass preventers need to be put down around the time the Forsythias bloom, or slightly before that. The problem is that it cannot be used when seeding a lawn - it will prevent germination of your grass seed. That's why overseeding is best done in the Fall.
What exactly is Crabgrass? It's an annual grass, Digitaria. It's not native to the US. It likes dry and compacted soil where it feels free to smother your lawn grass. Irrigated lawns tend not to grow much crabgrass, but lawn irrigation is for the 1%. Grasses are meant to go dormant in mid-summer.
What about lawn aeration? Heavily-used lawns (by people, dogs, wheelbarrows, lawn-mowers, etc) benefit from it annually. In Spring, you can do it after the third mowing. Not good to do it in mid-summer when the soil is too dry and the plugging tines cannot penetrate. I always go over an area a few times, not just once. It's a good work-out. Those plugs disintegrate quickly.
Heavy towable aerators are made for pastures, sports fields, and golf courses. Some do plugging, some do slicing, but I think deep plugging is best. 3" is the bare minimum because healthy grass roots are deeper than that.
A side-benefit of lawn aeration (and top-dressing) is earthworms. Earthworms cannot live in compacted soil, but they can happily aerate a soft and healthy turf themselves during all of the warm months. Besides aeration, they need food: your top dressing, grass clippings and mower-chopped leaves.
Who's been getting rich in the US? It's not the 1%, it's not even the 0.1% - it's the 0.01%
Do we all really hate and envy those star athletes, pop stars, movie stars, TV stars, inventors, successful entrepreneurs, and captains of industry? I sometimes envy their talents, skills, and money, but I sure don't hate them.
I agree with that. (I also believe that not all poverty is via 'culture of poverty.' There are a thousand sorts of poverty, including genteel poverty.) Dr. X summarizes that debate:
Is racism fundamentally causing the problems that afflict large swathes of urban black America or does an independently self-sustaining culture itself account for the afflictions? I think many people all too readily take one position or the other, feeling certain about it. I don't see things as quite that tidy. Jonathan Chait and Ta-Nehisi Coates have been hashing this out in a series of posts. Begin here with Coates, then a reaction from Chait, response from Coates, then Chait answers.
The United States passed its first sugar tariff in 1789, before Rhode Island got around to ratifying the Constitution. We’ve had some major public-policy changes over the years — abolishing slavery, women’s suffrage, direct election of senators, gay marriage here and there — but the sugar tariff stays and stays, the economic version of drug-resistant syphilis. It is a matter of pure political power: The sugar producers believe that the price that Americans are willing to pay for sugar is not the right price — which is to say, it’s a lower price than the one they would prefer — and so we pay more thanks to the cowardice of Congress and the predictable victory of the producers’ concentrated benefits over the consumers’ dispersed costs. As Willi Schlamm said, the problem with capitalism is capitalists, a motto that should be engraved in marble above the entrance to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
I agree that it is unfair and market-distorting - just like 1000 other government "favors."My view is that I want the Feds to have less money, less power, and less control.
From Scruton's The great swindle - From pickled sharks to compositions in silence, fake ideas and fake emotions have elbowed out truth and beauty:
Faking depends on a measure of complicity between the perpetrator and the victim, who together conspire to believe what they don’t believe and to feel what they are incapable of feeling. There are fake beliefs, fake opinions, fake kinds of expertise. There is also fake emotion, which comes about when people debase the forms and the language in which true feeling can take root, so that they are no longer fully aware of the difference between the true and the false. Kitsch is one very important example of this. The kitsch work of art is not a response to the real world, but a fabrication designed to replace it. Yet both producer and consumer conspire to persuade each other that what they feel in and through the kitsch work of art is something deep, important and real.
Anyone can lie. One need only have the requisite intention — in other words, to say something with the intention to deceive. Faking, by contrast, is an achievement.
Image stolen from 
I agree with Bernstein: 
A friend took that pic of a gamer at a gamer convention in Boston last week.
Rare Stradivarius 