Previous 10 Next 10 
To: ManyMoose who wrote (12738)5/4/2012 3:54:48 PM
From: TimF
2 Recommendations   of 23656

More at

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: Jorj X Mckie who wrote (12770)5/4/2012 4:19:43 PM
From: Jorj X Mckie
2 Recommendations   of 23656
Watched the movie "Children of Men" for about the 50th time last night. Love that movie.

Dystopian future world where no new children have been born in 18 years.

government is portrayed as totalitarian and vicious. The liberal activists are portrayed as....totalitarian and vicious.

The one of the activists even says "it's about a greater good" after a particularly heinous act is done by the activists.

I recommend watching this whenever it is on one of the movie channels, netflix or blockbuster.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

To: SmoothSail who wrote (12771)5/4/2012 5:21:45 PM
From: Jorj X Mckie
5 Recommendations   of 23656
Elizabeth Warren has put out a new quote about the oppression of her people and what the white man owes.

"No white man in country who got much wampum on his own. No White Man!. Sure the white man build factory out there — heap big good for you!

Fauxcohantas want to be clear. White man moved fur and thundersticks to outpost on the trails the rest of us gave wampum for. White man enslaved the children of the land to create your thundersticks. White man safe in forts because of territory marshals who rape and kill the children of the land. White man no worry that maurauding bands of Indians would come and seize everything at your thunderstick factory because he kill all of my people with his disease and guns. Now look, you built thundersticks and forts and it turned into something terrific— Sun God bless. Keep heap big hunk of it.

But part of the word of man with forked tongue say he give wampum to the children of our children so they no work and drink fire water and build giant dens for playing of poker."

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

To: Jorj X Mckie who wrote (12774)5/4/2012 5:30:45 PM
From: SmoothSail
4 Recommendations   of 23656
How! Me like lots of free wampum, free tepees, free firewater, many beads and one of those ponyless buggies that run on our corn and lightning.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

From: TimF5/5/2012 12:47:12 AM
   of 23656
Innovative (Meaning Insane) Land-Use Policy
posted in Regional planning

The Belgian Port of Antwerp needed to expand. But Belgium has a policy that any greenfield development must be offset by set-asides of already developed land. So the residents of an entire town were forcibly evicted and their town declared a “new nature preserve.”

The buildings in the town were not leveled, and instead planners are allowing them to decay through “natural reclamation.” This has led to a lot of graffiti, which happens to be the subject of the news article that is linked to above.

How long before such a policy makes its way to the western hemisphere? Considering how strict are the urban-growth boundaries in California, Oregon, and other states, it is likely that someone will soon propose it here. In California, the Sierra Club once demanded that developers of an area that was inside of the San Jose city limits donate $100 million to land-conservation efforts, leading the developers to quit the project. In Oregon, the Portland Business Alliance estimates there are no more than nine industrial parcels of land in the Portland area shovel-ready for projects, not because planners haven’t added to the urban-growth boundary but because the additions came with so many requirements before they can be developed that no development is likely to ever take place.

Portland in particular loves to brag that it is a European city, so don’t be surprised if the Keep-Portland-Weird crowd are the first in America to come up with a zero-net-development policy.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

From: TimF5/5/2012 12:14:52 PM
2 Recommendations   of 23656
Whatever the Motives, the Results Look Eerily Like Racism
May 1, 2012, 9:48 am

I have been reading of late some histories of Germany in the 1930's, with a particular emphasis on racial laws and policy. Over time the expanding bans on Jewish participation in the economy and society as well as preferences given to non-Jews for government jobs led to some practical problems, including:
  • What percentage of Jewish blood made one Jewish? The Nazis messed around with this problem a long time, in part because of Hitler’s absolute reluctance to get involved in such details. Was it one grandparent? Three grandparents?
  • How does one test for such things? In the thirties, there was an boom in geneology research in Germany, as everyone raced around trying to figure out what evidence was sufficient to establish someone’s race
It would be nice to think we put this kind of thing to bed, but here we are in the 21st century running around trying to answer the exact same questions
This story reminded me of the 1980s case of the twin red-haired Boston firefighters who claimed to be black, based on a photo of a great-grandmother and alleged oral history. While I remembered that they had gotten fired for their alleged fraud, I didn’t remember this detail:

Under current rules, said [general counsel to the state personnel office] Ms. Dale, candidates who say they are members of minority groups are judged by appearance, documented personal history and identification with a minority community. Disputes over claims of minority status are resolved by the Department of Personnel Administration.

And indeed, there eventually was a two-day administrative hearing, in which the hearing officer determined that the twins failed all three criteria, and thus were not black. A judge upheld the ruling, finding that the twins had claimed minority status in bad faith.I have to admit being under the impression until now that as a legal matter, minority status was an in issue of self-reporting. But at least in the Massachusetts Civil Service system, one can get fired for “racial fraud.”
  • Every year, in the name of some sort of racial harmony, I have to sit down and report to the government on the race of each of my employees. For 364 days a year I can ignore the race of my employees, but one day a year the government makes me wallow in it. Here are part of the instructions:
Self-identification is the preferred method of identifying the race and ethnic information necessary for the EEO-1 report. Employers are required to attempt to allow employees to use self-identification to complete the EEO-1 report. If an employee declines to self-identify, employment records or observer identification may be used.

Where records are maintained, it is recommended that they be kept separately from the employees basic personnel file or other records available to those responsible for personnel decisions.

Race and ethnic designations as used by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission do not denote scientific definitions of anthropological origins.

I am told we are trying to create a society free of racism, but the results sure look a lot like racism to me.


a_random_guy: As Jerry Pournelle has repeated written in his Chaos Manor blog:

- Fifty years ago, if you wanted to be color-blind and treat everyone the same, you were considered a hopeless liberal.

- Today, if you want to be color-blind and treat everyone the same, you are considered a right-wing racist.

You have it exactly right: the government forces us to be aware of race. This is not accidental; it is the foundation of an entire entitlement industry. If we treated people equally regardless of their race, the entire entitlement industry would go away. You would want to be responsible for unemployed bureaucrats, would you? Have a heart!

May 1, 2012, 10:33 am

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

From: longnshort5/5/2012 5:50:02 PM
   of 23656
got the mint juleps made, now waiting for the derby

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: SmoothSail who wrote (12775)5/5/2012 11:35:55 PM
From: Jorj X Mckie
1 Recommendation   of 23656
The boy knocks one out of the park.

We were down 0 - 2 at the top of 5 and JXN hits one over the fence (and hedge!) .

Dodgers scored another in the bottom of the 5th to make it 1 - 3.

Next inning, with one man on base, Michael W hits a two run HR to tie the game.

Nick got a walk which brought JXN up again. JXN hit a solid worm burner up the middle which brought in another run to bring the score to 4 - 3.

We held them to 3 runs in the 6th inning for the Win.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: Jorj X Mckie who wrote (12773)5/6/2012 2:54:16 AM
From: Brian Sullivan
   of 23656
thank for the recommendation, I watched it tonight.

Blade Runner meets Clockwork Orange with Homeland Security.

I like the Olympic games "London 2012" shirt that he wore through out the movie
and Pink floyds Animals flying pig was great too.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

From: TimF5/6/2012 10:31:30 AM
1 Recommendation   of 23656
Obamistas Confiscating Farmers’ Bank Accounts

Courtney Mabeus at writes that “..[t]he government is seeking to take more than $62,000 from a local dairy farmer who it says knowingly violated federal banking statutes meant to curtail money laundering…”
“…In a six-page complaint filed Thursday in U.S. District Court, U.S. Attorney for the District of Maryland Rod Rosenstein accused Randy and Karen Sowers, who own South Mountain Creamery on Bolivar Road in Middletown [Maryland], of violating federal currency reporting requirements — known as structuring — by depositing money in increments of less than $10,000 so they would not have to fill out forms required under the Bank Secrecy Act…The couple deposited more than $295,000 into a PNC Bank account in about 36 separate transactions of just under $10,000 each from May 6, 2011, though Feb. 27, 2012, Rosenstein said. During that time, the couple’s cash receipts from farmers markets, including two in Baltimore, totaled more than $320,000, the complaint said.”

Rady Ananda of says that:

“Admittedly, when the Sowers earned over $10,000 in February, and learned they’d have to fill out paperwork at the bank for such large deposits, they simply rolled the deposits over to keep them below the none-of-your-[...***...] -business amount, rather than waste time on bureaucratic red tape aimed at flagging terrorism or other illegal activities…“Structuring,” explains, “is the federal criminal offense of splitting up bank deposits so as to keep them under a threshold such as $10,000 above which banks have to report transactions to the government…While being questioned, the Sowers were finally presented with a seizure order and advised that the feds had already emptied their bank account of $70,000. The Dept. of Justice has since sued to keep $63,000 of the Sowers’ money, though they committed no crime other than maintaining their privacy…”

It would seem that, while the term “confiscating” is used to describe this method of taking people’s hard earned money and is an attempt at sugar-coating the outright seizure of funds, it amounts to stealing and robbery, regardless of the law the accused have allegedly violated.

Ananda states:

“Former Maryland assistant U.S. attorney Steven Levin told the paper, “The emphasis is on basically seizing money, whether it is legally or illegally earned. It can lead to financial ruin for business owners, and there’s a potential for abuse here by the government…Ya think?…The Bank Secrecy Act was modified* after 9/11, another in a long line of Constitutionally-abhorrent laws enacted by officials who cannot prove they were elected to office (given those elections were held on electronic voting systems that can be hacked without leaving evidence of the crime)…”

In light of federal government increased hirings of IRS personnel to administer ObamaCare, it appears the government has figured out a way to force more families out of business, and onto the unemployment lines, and this particular issue strikes at the heart of American culture: Family farming. For government this aspect of U.S. culture cannot be eradicated quickly enough and replaced with Corporate farming.

What do you think?

I don't think that government is trying to or wants to eradicate the family farm. What they do want to have is control. Passing an amount above which deposits had to be extensively documented wasn't enough for them, they have to make smaller deposits illegal by calling them "structuring". That's highly unreasonable. If for any reason the feds really need to know about the money going in in smaller deposits then lower the amount. Even one penny as the amount, would make more sense than allowing prosecutors to arbitrarily decide which deposits smaller than the amount they are going to consider felonies.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)
Previous 10 Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2018 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.Stock quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes - See Terms of Use.