Women are clearly very weak creatures who need the extra protection of government regulation when dealing with men in any situation.
Seriously? Did I grow up in this age/time only to be told that I don’t have enough power in me to say ‘bugger off’ to a man whistling to me on the street?
Apparently in the Netherlands:
The Labour party (PvdA) has launched draft legislation which would make it a criminal offence to sexually harass women on the street.
Read more at DutchNews.nl: Labour seeks to make sexual harassment on the streets a crime http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2017/02/labour-seeks-to-make-sexual-harassment-on-the-streets-as-crime/
ht Return of Kings who sees the future writing on the wall.
The part in bold regarding David Brooks’ pronouncement that he doesn’t have a clue.
Note that even David Brooks’ pronouncement that he needs to “socially mingle” with his lessers is just a regurgitation of another old idea he had — that the someone should set up programs to let The Elite go on camping trips with those of the lower orders, to facilitate such “social mingling.”
Or, as I like to say: David Brooks demands that a government program be set up which can introduce him to his doorman.
Robert Tracinsky looks into why there is not a #neverHillary movement like the #neverTrump movement.
It’s a good question. Here’s what he comes up with:
the left is more accustomed than the right to sacrificing scruples for the sake of power — or at least, it is more used to doing it openly. If your ideological goal is greater government control of the economy (and just about everything else), then wielding government power is an indispensable first step. You have to win before you can even discuss what it is you’re going to do with the levers of power.
On the right, the object is to REDUCE government power. I’m a Cruz supporter and yet when he goes stupid and says things about the ignorant electorate I cringe and immediately jump to all is lost. Clinton supporters don’t do that and apparently neither do Trump supporters.
Ace of Spades gives room for Stephen den Beste to write on the press and why they fight so hard to make certain that Obama is successful.
According to him:
But no one wants to hang Obama’s head on their wall. Any good little liberal press person who does that will be scorned for the rest of their lives by all the people they know whose opinions they value. You! You’re the one who ruined it all! It’ll be a hundred years until we can get another non-white-male elected, and it’s all your fault!
No one wants to be the one who breaks the spell, even though the Emperor truly does not have any clothes. Everyone is thinking the same thing: You know, Obama really isn’t a very good president. Truth to tell, he’s been terrible. People voted for him because he was black. He’s the first Affirmative Action President.
They’re all thinking that, but it’s, you know, racist and if anyone says it, they could start the process of ruining everything
Interesting thing…..bullshit. I don’t think for a second that Obama, this Barack Obama in any way reflects every other minority/female potential president out there. He is reflective of a knee jerk progressive community organizer and that’s it.
IF the media backs him because they assume that future minority/female candidates will be judged on his record then THEY are horrible racists and they think you are a horrible person.
Join us on Monday, May 13th, when we will be celebrating the first anniversary of the Flatirons chapter with a showing of “FrackNation” – a documentary that follows journalist Phelim McAleer as he seeks out the science behind, and truth about, fracking. After the movie there will be short Q&A with Americans for Prosperity, followed by the opportunity to network with other local liberty supporters. Come for the event, stay for the food and networking – you’re guaranteed a great evening no matter what!
Hope to see you there at Miller’s Bar and Grille in Lafayette
UPDATE: The movie was fun, the company was great and hopefully the fundraiser helped out the group.
The fracking people need a hook, a reason for people to be pro-fracking. Good luck with that.
Here’s the anti side: They poison us, they are ugly, they ream the earth and run off with the ugly profits and they want to drill right next door to you.
Here’s the pro side: Those anti people have no scientific evidence of any of that (except maybe the profits).
They’re not going to win with that argument.
Frackers should be engaging the world on how they have lowered emissions, and allowed drilling to occur in smaller areas than before. They should go on and on about no more need for Middle East involvement and how bad for the environment is importation of energy. They need a bunch of these guys talking about poor people and how fracking has helped to boost them. Instead they are suing the city of Longmont. [and good for them, they should]
Since really that’s the only way they will win, that’s what they need to do. I’ll support them, but to get me to care enough to leave my home and get involved in loud protests they’ll need a bigger hook. Maybe the old…..”First they came for the frackers and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a fracker…” line.
3 things that leave me seeing red concerning this administration.
Fast and Furious
Am listening to the hearing happening right now.
I have no premonition on how this will play in the media, nor do I really care. At least this stuff is now out there.
I wish someone would tell a Democrat (any Democrat in the hearing) who is pressing the well known “fact” that help would have arrived too late, “What difference does it make” when there was a) no way to know if that would be true at the time as the attack could have lasted for days and b) this hearing has 3 parts, pre, during, post attack. Deal with all 3.
We knew all of this, but still….wow:
An ongoing Congressional investigation across five House Committees concerning
the events surrounding the September 11, 2012, terrorist attacks on U.S. facilities in
Benghazi, Libya has made several determinations to date, including:
Reductions of security levels prior to the attacks in Benghazi were approved at the
highest levels of the State Department, up to and including Secretary Clinton. This
fact contradicts her testimony before the House Foreign Affairs Committee on
January 23, 2013.
In the days following the attacks, White House and senior State Department
officials altered accurate talking points drafted by the Intelligence Community in
order to protect the State Department.
Contrary to Administration rhetoric, the talking points were not edited to protect
classified information. Concern for classified information is never mentioned in
email traffic among senior Administration officials.
These preliminary findings illustrate the need for continued examination and
oversight by the five House Committees. The Committees will continue to review who
exactly was responsible for the failure to respond to the repeated requests for more
security and for the effort to cover up the nature of the attacks, so that appropriate officials
will be held accountable.
Welcome to the new blog! I figured the most appropriate opening would be with a calf blog due to all of you looking for the little buggers, so here we go!