February 29, 2016
And there was a time in this country, a long time ago, when reading wasn't just for fags and neither was writing. People wrote books and movies, movies that had stories so you cared whose ass it was and why it was farting, and I believe that time can come again!
-- Not Sure
Well none of us did. At least not in our lifetimes. So anyway I'm now shifting my investments into Costco and various electrolyte-based beverages.
Finally, a comment on the cost of big government and human productivity. My husband, bless his heart, earns a nice living, for which I am grateful every minute of every day. As for me, because I followed the traditional female path of dropping out of the job market in order to raise my family, my work doesn't sell for a very high price. Nevertheless, because I'm good at what I do, when my clients need a hand, they still call on me. I accept the work, not because I want to do it or because I need to do (thank you, Mr. Bookworm!), but because my clients are also my friends and they've asked for my help.
Last year, I helped a client take two cases to trial between January and the end of June. I worked 40-50 hour weeks while still caring for my household (including three teens) and my mother. During that half year, I ended up earning less than a fifth of what my husband earned for an entire year of work (with his hours ranging from 20-60 hours per week. and with 100% of his energy devoted to work, because I took care of everything else).
Because of my husband, my earnings were taxed in a higher bracket than they would have been otherwise. I also had to pay around 14% in social security taxes. The net result was that my accountant said "You shouldn't bother working. It's not worth it for you, personally, to expend the effort in order to have only about $10,000 left untouched by the government after six months of work."
One could argue that, because my husband and I together earn a very decent salary, I shouldn't cavil about the fact that our collective wealth is subject to a high tax rate. That's certainly true. But I also value my time. To work 700-800 hours - very hard, stressful hours - for only $10,000 would be a good use of my time only if I desperately needed the money (in which case I would do any moral and legal work, and consider it good). Since I don't need the money (for which I am grateful), I'm not going to work this year if I can help it.You can applaud or denigrate my personal calculations. But let me ask you a larger, societal question about the economic decision the tax code drives me toward: Is it worth it to society if I work?
All College Hate Crimes Are Hoaxes Until Proven Otherwise: Upstate N.Y. students who claimed bias attack now face criminal charges
Did anyone ask whether the boy self-identifies as a female science contest entrant? No they did not.more...
— Ace Hands down, the angriest, most savage primary I've seen.
Flashback: As Powerline noted at the time, Hannity's one-hour interview with Rubio about his Amnesty Bill was just embarrassing for all involved, including FoxNews, which has had a full-court press on amnesty since 2012 (if not before).
As Mickey Kaus always notes: FoxNews makes amnesty easy for the GOP, by refusing to give much voice to the case against it. FoxNews goes out of its way to not cover the issue much.
Forgot to mention why I posted this: Because Hannity is claiming he supported a false version of Gang of Eight.
Who provided him with that false version?
Well, Marco Rubio. The guy who's been Gang of Eight's pointman for pulling the wool over the eyes of the right all along.
— Open Blogger Introducing "The Happiness Thread", where people get to share things that make them happy or add enjoyment to their lives.
Anything that makes you smile or laugh or allows you to appreciate simple things in life are welcome. Consider this thread as a breather from contentious political threads. Your aid in keeping this a non political thread will be greatly appreciated, and I greatly thank CBD for getting it set up.
In the descriptive blurb to Dennis Prager's book on happiness, Prager asserts that we're actually obligated to be happy, because it makes us better people. Achieving that happiness won't be easy, though: to Prager, it requires a continuing process of counting your blessings and giving up any expectations that life is supposed to be wonderful. "Can we decide to be satisfied with what we have?" he asks. "A poor man who can make himself satisfied with his portion will be happier than a wealthy man who does not allow himself to be satisfied." more...
— Ace As regards Trump, it's pretty easy to find his previous support (when he wasn't running for president and didn't have to claim things like that he's super into the Bible) for gun control.
Dems and Reps are both wrong on guns
Its often argued that the American murder rate is high because guns are more available here than in other countries. Democrats want to confiscate all guns, which is a dumb idea because only the law-abiding citizens would turn in their guns and the bad guys would be the only ones left armed. The Republicans walk the NRA line and refuse even limited restrictions.
Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
For assault weapon ban, waiting period, & background check
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With todays Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.
Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
Of course he supported the very reasonable ban on assault weapons. Because that's what people without any sort of conservative ideology do -- they adopt the easy, path-of-least-resistance claims of the left.
But as for Marco Rubio -- this is a new one on me.
"I will not compromise your Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms," the U.S. senator from Texas told supporters. "You know, it's worth noting my two leading competitors have both previously supported banning firearms. Donald Trump supported Bill Clinton's nationwide ban on many of the most popular firearms in America, and Marco Rubio, when he was on the city council in West Miami, voted to ban firearms in public parks. Let me tell you this: There is no universe in which I would ever support banning guns because I believe in the Second Amendment."
Cruz's criticism of Rubio centers on a resolution from 1999 that urged the Florida Legislature "to prohibit firearms in county or municipal parks, recreational facilities, or playgrounds, which are locations where children frequently congregate." With Rubio present, the West Miami City Commission unanimously approved the resolution, according to minutes from its March 3, 1999, meeting.
Maybe not the worst sort of gun-grabby position, but I'm interested to hear Rubio either defend this or explain how he "evolved."
A former NRA president says Rubio was no friend to gun rights, and while he publicly talked up a pro-gun-rights bill to permit guns in motor vehicles, behind the scenes he was working to subvert it.
According to Politico, Hammer described Rubio as a man who talked pro-gun when the cameras were rolling but worked in ways that hurt the bill's chances of passage behind the scenes. Hammer said, "He has not been a friend to gun owners. He tried to cover himself by voting for it after doing everything he could to work against it. He plays to an audience. We will make sure our members know."
The "Preservation and Protection of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms in Motor Vehicles Act" passed the legislature in 2008--during Rubio's tenure as Florida House Speaker--and was signed into law by Governor Charlie Crist. Rubio voted for the measure, yet just over a year after it was signed, Hammer reflected on the effort it took to get the bill passed and said, "[Rubio] was a big disappointment to us when he was the speaker. He talked the talk, but he didnt walk the walk,"according to the Tampa Bay Times.
— Ace In the below thread, a commenter claims that Cruz has "flip-flopped" on H1B visas.
That's true. I can't deny it because I don't like lying. Cruz has previously supported more H1B visas; now he's calling for a mortatorium on them, until the labor market tightens and wages increase.
And what about Trump?
People like quoting the Sessions Immigration Plan that's posted on Trump's website, and citing it as if that's Trump's position.
In fact, Trump seems to not have read it -- because in the debates soon following after he posted Sessions' immigration plan on his website, he began talking up how we had to get the "best people" from around the world to work here. That is, we had to give out more H1Bs to high skilled foreign workers.
Don't believe me? How about believing consummate border hawk Mark Krikorian?
This was after the CNBC debate. In that debate, Rubio dissembled (what a shock) on what his actual policy on H1-B tech visas was. Being Jeff Zuckerberg's personal senator, Rubio claimed he was going to be tough on them. In fact, Rubio supports greatly expanding the program.
As usual, Rubio told Republican audiences he was totally gung-ho for enforcement while not sharing with them that he actually supported expanding immigration, green cards, and H1-Bs.
Trump was then asked about this -- and instead of attacking Rubio for his dissembling, he agreed with Rubio that we needed to have more "great people" from around the world working here.
TRUMP ♥ ZUCKERBERG
Rubio's vulnerability on immigration would have been more obvious to viewers if Trump had not, in effect, renounced his own critique of the issue and embraced Rubio's position. Becky Quick offered Trump an ideal opportunity to follow Rubio with his critique of the H-1B program. After all, Trump's own immigration platform calls for the very reforms to H-1B that Rubio falsely claimed he supported.
But exposing Rubio's falsehoods would have required Trump to have actually read his own policy on immigration. He has not. Further proof that he hasn't done so came when Becky Quick asked him about the line in his policy paper that attacks the I-Squared bill by referring to Rubio as "Mark Zuckerbergs personal senator." Trump's response was "I never said that" and "I have [said] nothing at all critical of him," meaning Zuckerberg. Only later did Quick mention that the criticism appeared on Trumps own website, though Quick oddly apologized for bringing it up.
Instead, Trump embraced Zuckerberg and echoed the tech billionaire's call to let all foreign STEM graduates stay in the U.S. He went further, essentially renouncing the entire pro-worker portion of his immigration program:
I'm in favor of people coming into this country legally. And you know what? They can have it anyway you want. You can call it visas, you can call it work permits, you can call it anything you want. . . . As far as Mark is concerned, as far as the visas are concerned, if we need people, they have -- it's fine. They have to come into this country legally. We have a country of borders. We have a country of laws. We have to obey the laws. It's fine if they come in, but they have to come in legally.
Thus does Trump embrace the "legal good/illegal bad" perspective on immigration, wherein huge, even unlimited admissions of foreign workers are okay, so long as theyre given a piece of paper on the way in.
This is consistent with leaked excerpts from Trumps upcoming book, in which he is said to write: "I don't want to stop legal immigration to this country. In fact, I would like to reform and increase immigration in some important ways."
Contrast this with his immigration platform: "Before any new green cards are issued to foreign workers abroad, there will be a pause where employers will have to hire from the domestic pool of unemployed immigrant and native workers."
Not to even mention Trump's flip-flop on self-deportation, which is now (I guess) his position (although, as usual, he's incoherent to the point of babbling on it), but called it "mean" and "maniacal" in 2012.
Republicans didn't have anything going for them with respect to Latinos and with respect to Asians; the Democrats didn't have a policy for dealing with illegal immigrants. What they did have going for them is they weren't mean-spirited about it... Romney had a crazy policy of self-deportation which was maniacal, it sounded as bad as it was. He lost the Latino vote, he lost the Asian vote. He lost anybody who was inspired to come into this country.
Krikorian has this kicker of an ending, dismissing both Rubio and then Trump:
The immigration dove that sounds like a hawk, and the ostensible hawk who turns out to be a dove. I imagine Zuckerberg is pleased.
So has Trump flip-flopped on deportations? Obviously, but it's doubtful he means it; the whole "Big Beautiful Door" thing is as straighforward a signal that you could hope to have that he's not serious about deporting anyone.
And on H1-B's -- I'm not even sure he flip-flopped. Per his own pronouncements -- putting to one side the Sessions immigration plan he's never read -- he's still a huge fan of bringing in all the "great people" from around the world on H1-B's or "whatever you want to call it."
So it might be more accurate to say Donald Trump has never flip-flopped on this issue -- he still holds the same "let as many legal immigrants in as possible" position he always held. I've never heard him actually argue for the Sessions limitations on H1-Bs.
But that might not be the defense that Trump supporter wishes to mount.
So yeah I'll be a man, and I'll do what men do -- tell the truth, and not tell stupid little lies like children and 7th grade girls.
I'll admit that Cruz has filp-flopped on H1-B's -- and now has the right position on them.
But don't come at me like a shill and a hack and tell me that Donald Trump has not flip-flopped on this. The pixels on his website were still wet when he went out and contradicted all of Sessions' immigration plan on H1-Bs. He still talks the exact same way.
Update: Michelle Malkin was the one who introduced me to the Disney train-your-replacement H1-B scandal.
She was, at least in October, unimpressed by Trump's "double talk" on the issue.
Which is why I urged caution/skepticism of double-talking Trump all along. https://t.co/YDRuLb69YS— Michelle Malkin (@michellemalkin) October 29, 2015
— Ace Given that this is his signature issue, and the only thing I personally would entertain voting for him on, I'd sure like to know if this is true.
The New York Times can't release the off-the-record transcripts-- but Donald Trump could, and he could give them permission to do so.
Of course, I don't think he will.
Ben Smith, at Buzzfeed:
On Saturday, columnist Gail Collins, one of the attendees at the meeting (which also included editor-in-chief Dean Baquet), floated a bit of speculation in her column:
The most optimistic analysis of Trump as a presidential candidate is that he just doesnt believe in positions, except the ones you adopt for strategic purposes when youre making a deal. So you obviously can't explain how youre going to deport 11 million undocumented immigrants, because it's going to be the first bid in some future monster negotiation session.
Sources familiar with the recording and transcript --which have reached near-mythical status at the Times -- tell me that the second sentence is a bit more than speculation. It reflects, instead, something Trump said about the flexibility of his hard-line anti-immigration stance.
So what exactly did Trump say about immigration, about deportations, about the wall? Did he abandon a core promise of his campaign in a private conversation with liberal power brokers in New York?
"If [Trump] wants to call up and ask us to release this transcript, he's free to do that and then we can decide what we would do," Rosenthal said.
All candidates are taking a strategic position on immigration: Rubio is pretending that he'll actually secure the border before rushing to grant amnesty (he won't). Cruz is saying he is against legalization "now and forever." Trump is claiming he'll deport 11 million people before letting most of them back in through a Big Beautiful Door.
As far as the immigration hard-line goes, I imagine there's going to be some bargaining on this.
But I'd like to know just how flexible the guy running as a "deal-maker," the guy who says "you have to be a little bit establishment," is on his signature issue.
— Ace When MSNBC pre-empted Melissa Harris-Perry's show for election coverage (which got higher ratings, and also is more compelling than Melissa Harris-Perry's show), she sent out an email which objected to her show being "taken" in the most overwrought terms conceivable and kinda-sorta implied that MSNBC was trying to "own" her, like a slave.
She also implied that MSNBC was trying to change the "racial composition" of its on-air talent.
MSNBC now says this email destroyed their working relationship and that they're out of the Tampon Earring business.
— Ace So far.
The details are sick-making. Trigger Warning.
Frederick Edwin Church, "The Evening Star" (1859)
— Open Blogger
- Academy Award winners
- Gun free zone for thee but not me
- Trump picks up another endorsement
- Bill Clinton heckled on campaign trail
- Affirmative action babe out of work
- Hopeful scientific news
- Chris Christie extra large pawn
- IRS hack worse than originally thought
- Religion of peace strikes again
- In case you missed it Clinton wins in SC
- Bernie Sanders caught red handed in cookie jar
- Moar nanny state laws
- Feel good story of the day
— andy 2016 has an extra day, and it's a Monday. Seems about right.
February 28, 2016
"You see, with me, they're not protected, because I'm not like other people but I'm not taking money. I'm not taking their money. So we're going to open up libel laws, and we're going to have people sue you like you've never got sued before."
-- Donald Trump
Have you ever noticed that whenever liberals say that something won't happen, it happens?
-- Benny Huang
The summer menu on a notice board says its either ham salad or roast beef for lunch on Thursday and chicken risotto or chicken caesar salad for dinner. Vegetarian options are either mushroom risotto or balsamic mushroom with cos, fetta and egg.
-- from a description of Australia's new 'human rights compliant' prison
One of the great scandals over the last two or three decades is how so many barriers have been raised to keep people from starting their own service businesses.
One of the more insidious ways that insiders with political power have rigged the economy against less-skilled workers over the past generation is by imposing licensing requirements for working class professions, restricting the job supply, raising prices, and squelching competition. As Sen. Mike Lee noted in an important op-ed last month, "security guards, florists, barbers, massage therapists, interior decorators, manicurists, hair stylists, personal trainers, tree trimmers and auctioneers work in just some of the many, many professions that state legislatures have seen fit to cartelize." So it's encouraging to see that the largest state in the union is mulling over rolling them back.
And by hate speech he means criticizing migrants and Germany's refugee policy and replacing 'Black Lives Matter' on Facebook's wall with 'All Lives Matter'.
'I don't feeel no-ways tahrrd.'more...
— Ace The pre-show's already on. The actual event is at 8:30 eastern, on ABC.
Major category nominees:
The Big Short
Bridge of Spies
Mad Max: Fury Road
ACTOR IN A LEADING ROLE
Bryan Cranston, Trumbo
Matt Damon, The Martian
Leonardo DiCaprio, The Revenant
Michael Fassbender, Steve Jobs
Eddie Redmayne, The Danish Girl
ACTRESS IN A LEADING ROLE
Cate Blanchett, Carol
Brie Larson, Room
Jennifer Lawrence, Joy
Charlotte Rampling, 45 Years
Saoirse Ronan, Brooklyn
ACTOR IN A SUPPORTING ROLE
Christian Bale, The Big Short
Tom Hardy, The Revenant
Mark Ruffalo, Spotlight
Mark Rylance, Bridge of Spies
Sylvester Stallone, Creed
ACTRESS IN A SUPPORTING ROLE
Jennifer Jason Leigh, The Hateful Eight
Rooney Mara, Carol
Rachel McAdams, Spotlight
Alicia Vikander, The Danish Girl
Kate Winslet, Steve Jobs
The Big Short
Mad Max: Fury Road
WRITING (ADAPTED SCREENPLAY)
The Big Short
WRITING (ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY)
Bridge of Spies
Straight Outta Compton
— Open Blogger Hey....this is just cool stuff.
No politics if you can help it.
Videos under the fold.....
Addendum: If it's a scrub, then all bets are off and you can talk about presidential erotica (check the book thread) and lutefisk and whatever your psychotic minds can come up with.....
— Open Blogger
The only kind of seafood I trust is the fish stick, a totally featureless fish that doesn't have eyeballs or fins.
-- Dave Barry
It wasn't too long ago that finding fresh seafood was a difficult thing if you didn't catch it yourself or live in a coastal city. But with the explosion in demand, driven in part by health concerns, and improved technology for processing and transportation, most people have access to high-quality seafood. And aquaculture has provided a huge new source of inexpensive, reasonable quality stuff.
Farmed IQF (individually quick frozen) shrimp is now ubiquitous and inexpensive. Sure, it's not the equivalent of fresh American shrimp you can buy off the docks, but it's still pretty good.
Farmed salmon has improved tremendously in the past several years. It used to be mushy and fatty and clearly inferior to the obscenely expensive wild-caught stuff. But now, with improvements in aquaculture and a streamlined transportation system, it is, in my opinion, better than most wild caught salmon.
As demand skyrocketed so did the fishing industry's reach into previously ignored species. Chilean Sea Bass is a hipster favorite, and damned pricy too. In my neck of the woods it is well over $20/lb. But I'll bet you wouldn't pay that for Patagonian toothfish, which is a nasty-looking garbage fish that fishermen used to ignore. more...
— Open Blogger Today's feature: The 'Folds of Honor QuikTrip 500' on the 1.54 mile Quad-Oval at Atlanta Motor Speedway
Start time is 1:00 pm.
#1 - Busch in car 41
#2 - McMurray in car 1
#3 - Bayne in car 6
#4 - Newman in car 31
I feel the need to drop this here. First, it's ugly. Then awesome!
— Open Blogger
Good morning to all of you morons and moronettes and bartenders everywhere and all the ships at sea. And to all you young lovers wherever you are, we hope your problems are few. Welcome to AoSHQ's stately, prestigious, internationally acclaimed and high-class Sunday Morning Book Thread. The Sunday Morning Book Thread is the only AoSHQ thread that is so hoity-toity, pants are required.
“Be as careful of the books you read, as of the company you keep; for your habits and character will be as much influenced by the former as the latter.”
― Paxton Hood
What Did The Pope Know And When Did He Know It?
So a few years ago (1999) British journalist and author John Cornwell came out with a book entitled Hitler's Pope: The Secret History of Pius XII, the main thesis of which is that the Pope Pius XII was an anti-semite whose actions prior to WWII facilitated Hiltler's rise to power, and, ultimately, the Holocaust.
The book was, to say the least, controversial. A ex-Catholic friend of mine was quite impressed with it, and wanted me, another ex-Catholic, to be impressed with it, too. This was the early days of teh interwebs, but even so, I was able to Google up enough material to not be impressed. Whole books have since been written that refute Cornwell's thesis. Here's the one I found to be the most interersting, Before the Dawn: Autobiographical Reflections by Eugenio Zolli, Former Chief Rabbi of Rome:
This is the remarkable and inspiring story of how the famous and revered Chief Rabbi of Rome, Israel Zolli, became a Christian and entered the Catholic Church after World War II. This classic work outlines the spiritual journey of Rabbi Zolli, through prayer, Scripture meditation and lived experience, from devout Judaism to Catholicism...Zolli took the Christian name of Eugenio to honor Pope Pius XII (Eugenio was his baptismal name) for all he did to save Jews during WWII.
Now if Pius XII was the anti-semite Cornwell claims, than the conversion of Rabbi Zolli and his adoption of Pius' baptismal name makes absolutely no sense at all.
Cornwell has since backed down a bit -- but not entirely -- from his earlier claims. In a 2008 interview, he said:
While I believe with many commentators that the pope might have done more to help the plight of the Jews, I now feel, 10 years after the publication of my book, that his scope for action was severely limited and I am prepared to state this.... Nevertheless, due to his ineffectual and diplomatic language in respect of the Nazis and the Jews, I still believe that it was incumbent on him to explain his failure to speak out after the war. This he never did.
So Cornwell has gone from making incendiary accusations that Pius XII was a big-ass anti-semite who enabled Hitler to carry out the Holocaust to carping about what he thinks he should have said afterwards. This sounds like mighty weak sauce. And on ace's Pope Francis thread a week or so ago, moron commenter MikeTheMoose pointed me to another interesting book, Church of Spies: The Pope's Secret War Against Hitler by intelligence expert Mark Riebling. According to a Breitbart review:
After the Nazi invasion of Poland in 1939, the German military conspirators sought to reach out to their adversaries, especially the British, to seek aid in overthrowing Hitler. In order to do this, they needed a person who could serve as an intermediary and vouch for their integrity, and so they approached Pius XII, who was highly regarded in Britain...What followed was a series of gripping events, leading to repeated efforts to depose Hitler, all of which were foiled by unexpected turns, deceit, bombs that failed to detonate, and ones that did go off, only to miss their target. In their quest, the anti-Nazi officers received crucial moral and logistical support from Pius XII, as well as from his closest aides.
And there's another book mentioned in that same Breitbart review, The Pope's Jews: The Vatican's Secret Plan to Save Jews from the Nazis by Gordon Thomas, which
...depicts Pius XII...saving the lives of countless Jews through ingenious means. Pius gave his blessing to the establishment of safe houses in the Vatican, for example, as well as overseeing a secret operation with code names and fake documents for priests who risked their lives to shelter Jews, some of whom were even made Vatican citizens.
Thomas reports that priests were instructed to issue baptism certificates to hundreds of Jews hidden in Genoa, Rome and elsewhere in Italy. More than 2,000 Hungarian Jews were brought to Rome, after having been given fabricated Vatican documents identifying them as Catholics. Meanwhile, more than 4,000 Jews were hidden in convents and monasteries across Italy.
And I would add that any one of these operations might be jeopardized if anything was said publicly.
So not only was Pius definitely not "cool with Hitler", he was actively engaged in clandestine operations intended to thwart Hitler's plans to remake Europe.
"Love", Paul reminds us in the 13th chapter of his first Epistle to the Corinthians, "hopes all things" (v. 7). So I'm hoping that the current Pope's left-wing gasbaggery is just a front for some deep cover stuff that he really can't talk about. Maybe he's working some sort of scam on the Castro brothers, where imprisoned Cuban dissidents are going to be freed in exchange for suitcases full of cash that will turn out to be old issues of Granma newspaper cut in the shape of $100 bills. And maybe the "phantom sniper" who's recently been thinking globally and acting locally by picking off ISIS a-holes is a Jesuit sharpshooter, or, better yet, an Israeli sniper on loan from the Mossad.
Somebody could write a book about that.
— Open Blogger Aside from being evil, that is.
Campaign won't allow press to shoot video of HRC getting on/off jet. Tell reporters to get on their plane before Clinton will board hers.— Dan Merica (@danmericaCNN) February 27, 2016
— Open Blogger Congratulations on surviving Saturday.
February 27, 2016
— CDR M
"Virtually every foreign tech company doing business in China is going to have to make some concessions to the government, just as the price of entry," said Charlie Custer, a writer and expert on tech in China.
The end of the article cracked me up. Google has a high, moral standard? more...
45 queries taking 4.7931 seconds, 281 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.