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
Saturday, November 20. 2010
Somebody informed Insty about this book: The Blame Game: The Complete Guide to Blaming: How to Play and How to Quit
But blame is essential for self-esteem
Sol Stern tells the story of Tel Aviv
Stefani Germanotta is buying a Scottish castle
You needed to know that.
Getting Ahead In Today’s Mad Max Real Estate Market - Why the end game of this housing bust is going to be unlike any other in my lifetime. He says:
Mona Charen: Why Sarah Palin Shouldn't Run
Like I say, I love her but she ain't my candidate. She is good at what she's doing - she should keep it up and enjoy life.
And at Powerline:
Secretary of State Clinton Lashes Out at Europe; Demands That They Appease Muslims
Kotkin: How Liberalism self-destructed. A quote:
I think he wants to be re-elected. Guess he likes the gig.
Wisdom via SDA:
I admit I have been as reluctant to admit this as anyone. My whole career has been based on the proposition that somewhere, under all the insults and lying and general bad behaviour that makes up the bulk of political life, there was some genuine issue at stake: that if you could just strip away the politics, you would eventually get to the policy. It has taken me all these years to understand that, no, it’s just politics all the way down.
Tracked: Nov 20, 08:12
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
Stefani Germanotta is buying a Scottish castle
I'm sure that Doc Mercury will be suitably impressed. :>)
Strangling innovation with red tape
A simple fix, added to the Constitution:
"Those regulations of the United States that are not expressly worded in legislation passed by Congress shall apply only to the employees, officials, and military personnel of the United States, and then only as required to ensure the performance of their duties."
It allows Obama to make regulations for how the Army and the FBI do business, but requires that everything applying to a private business be set down in law.
This will substantially reduce the number of regulations made, which is good. If a regulation does not warrant the attention of 535 Congressmen, then it does not warrant the obedience of 300 million citizens.
Can someone tell me when Liberals became "Progressives"? Progressive sounds forward thinking, when we all know that Liberal thought (which is really Progressive thought) is antiquated and ill-considered. So how has the terminology changed from a pejorative to a positive connotation?
They were called Progressives back in the Wilson and TR era.
Good gosh! Now there are 40 millionaires (mostly liberal democrats) who have their own website. On this site they state very clearly that they WANT to be taxed more heavily. Yes, you heard me correctly 40 dutiful democrats are asking Obama to repeal the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy (or just let them expire).
What I do not understand is this: why has no one tied together these two items?
1. SS for the wealthy
2. tax cuts for the wealthy
There must be some magical number that a wealthy person attains that says to everyone--ok, now this person is wealthy. From now they shall be charged a higher rate to pay into SS, or they can opt to drop out of SS at this level. Then when they turn 67 they can either collect what had been accumulated prior to that cut off point, or they will have paid a much higher rate (most will not do).
In this way the SS bill will have been reduced substantially, because most of the wealthy will not be collecting SS. Tell me please, I am not the only one that see the linkage here! It is time to stop giving SS to the wealthy retirees as the system is set up now. (Yes, I know they paid into it.)
You might even go so far as to give us middle class folks a real break, and give us a CHOICE. Do we want SS from the gov't at current formula, or do we get to pick and choose which Wall Street con artist we will trust with our future retirement funds. Why have we come to a stalemate in which it has to be one way or the other?
SecState Clinton's latest outburst from Foggy Bottom reminds me once again of P.J. O'Rourke's great line:
"Any prolonged examination of the U.S. government reveals foreign policy to be America's miniature schnauzer - a noisy but small and useless part of the national household."
(It's a neat quote even though I own an elderly miniature schnauzer.
Or rather, he lets me think I own him. Ha ha!)
Missy Mona's "some of the reasons she should not run" didn't include Missy Sarah's shrill caterwaullings.
Perhaps, chicks don't notice or maybe, Mona desribes same as sizzle and flash.
Mona's spot on; Palin is immature, cheesy, given to political sniping, undignified, irresponsible and damaging.
She is as one of the lads at cafe this morn commented, "...sure good lookin'."
Good lookin' ain't a quality needed for high political office.
Sarah Palin should stay home and maybe teach her other children how to dance.
If she doesn't know how that's another nonqualifier.
Secretary of State Clinton ain't been listenin' to Msr Sarkosy.
Nijab isn't a religious expression and it is not being banned as such.
Rather than banning burqas and nijabs USA should ban and deport muslimas and muslims, alike.
See ya later Muhammadans, and i like salami.
TR was a "Progressive". But he was also pro-business (just anti-monopoly) and against corrupt practices when dealing with business (as opposed to giving GM, AIG, Goldman Sachs and numerous other firms what they want).
These are NOT the Progessives of that era. If I lived back then, I'd be labeled "Progressive" - and today I'm called "Conservative"
Would somebody please explain to me why I should "appease" Muslims? They aren't making the slightest effort to appease me, or my country. Why should we adapt to their primitive and violent culture, dumbing down our own back to 900 AD? They mean me nothing but harm ... I'm old, I'm female and thus a chattel in their eyes, and I'm white.
Don't try to convince me that there are "moderate Muslims". Moderates in any religion try to contain the violent folks in their beliefs with advice and censure.. I haven't heard a peep of self-reproof from Muslims. Instead, they are fatuously self-admiring.
Back in the day, when folks emigrated to our country, they did so with an earnest effort to assimilate into our culture. And they did. But Muslims want to swan into our country, take it over, and change it to the violent bullying ways of the countries they just left. And, as their "instruction manual" the Koran instructs them, they should feel free to lie to infidels [that's us Westerners, folks] any time they want to and it serves their purpose.
Soo ... no Muslim appeasing from my direction. Americans may be slow to anger, but eventually, they are terrible in their wrath, as Al Quaeda and Afghanistan have found out.