Conservativism is reactionary and cowardly. Conservatives are forever doomed to play to not lose, instead of playing to win, always seeking approval while posturing as if they're not. It's a soy ideology.

https://twitter.com/BenSettle/status/983948354139779075

No one cares about the rule of law any more -

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DaepA_JWkAAB3-Q.jpg:large

and the world has gone topsy turvy - Shrine to dead burglar

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/shrine-dead-burglar-near-house-12332787

Oh, Britannia! But this was foreshadowed at the surrender of Yorktown:

As the British and Hessian troops marched out to surrender, the British band played the song “The World Turned Upside Down.”

I'm old enough to remember when it was cool to let political operatives have access to Facebook's data.

http://dailycaller.com/2018/04/10/thom-tillis-zuckerberg-user-data-obama-campaign/

People who exaggerate the dangers to women aren’t heroes. They are the reason my grandmother had to give up her dreams.

https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/293438/

I thought Person of Interest was entertainment, not a documentary.

Amazon Rekognition

Amusing and scary all at the same time.

https://twitter.com/CcibChris/status/981662017177227269/photo/1

It's Equal Pay Day, or some such. Emphasis mine.

Every time women are polled about this or their choices are taken into account, we find that they are more likely to make choices based on quality of life issues and flexibility, not pay. This tendency leads to women being paid less, according to the Department of Labor’s median calculation, because they are more represented in less dangerous, more flexible work with fewer hours, closer to home.

http://thefederalist.com/2018/04/10/equal-pay-day-hype-ignores-the-facts-and-womens-feelings-about-the-workplace/

Don't forget, something like 93% of the workplace fatalities occur to men.

I like lien stories. This is a sweet one from Amy's: Jim S. at September 2, 2011 2:41 PM.

And here's a new one from Twitter.

Killing for profit -

https://medium.com/@drjasonfung/the-corruption-of-evidence-based-medicine-killing-for-profit-41f2812b8704

Profiting from the upcoming higher education bubble collapse -

https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/e5490e_d28addc85ae047aaad8b22a8bfd002f8.pdf

Paul Ryan not running for re-election -

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/04/11/house-speaker-paul-ryan-wont-run-for-re-election-ap-reports.html

And here's a new one from Twitter.

A happy story were Florida Man comes out on top. Excellent use of "I have a judgement, now I have a lien, and now you're going to pay me to go away".

Yesterday was #EqualPayDay

Just remember, according to the bls.gov women work 66% of the hours men do to earn 80% of the pay that men do

80/66=1.21

Women for the same time worked earn 20% more than their male peers

End the wage gap now! Pay men more money!!

LA to whitewash itself. Isn't that racist?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5597085/LA-paints-streets-white-reduce-effects-climate-change.html

Paul Ryan not running for re-election ~ Snoopy at April 11, 2018 9:55 AM

This is not good. Ryan was one of the few left in Congress who understood his job was to govern the county and not to win an argument at all costs.

I thought this was a rather odd case when I first heard of it. If it plays out the way it is described in the article, I foresee a nifonging in several prosecutor's future.

http://thefederalist.com/2018/03/21/why-the-greitens-prosecutor-could-be-the-one-who-ends-up-in-jail/

Ryan was one of the few left in Congress who understood his job was to govern the county and not to win an argument at all costs.

Ehhh...he was a budget hawk, right? so how did the Speaker allow that craptastic pile of pork called the Omnibus to pass?

Easter recess more important than trimming the budget?

...so how did the Speaker allow that craptastic pile of pork called the Omnibus to pass? ~ I R A Darth Aggie at April 11, 2018 12:45 PM ~

Because the Speaker doesn't get to dictate which laws pass. And more Congressmen voted for it than voted against it.

We got the government we voted for. And we're going broke with it. That's on us, not him.

Haahahahahoohoohooheeheehee-Ooops!

Facebook's biggest Black Lives Matter page turns out to have been run by an middle-aged white guy in Australia

https://twitter.com/clairlemon/status/983519247371415552

Bromance in a Biblical way:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+Samuel+1%3A26&version=CSB

Redheads are like unicorns.

https://twitter.com/MrEwanMorrison/status/983673306644697088

Galloway is like Jordan only a lot more fun.

> That's on us, not him.

No, I'd say some of that's on him.

(I hate that expression though... I don't put things on people. Except that one thing, and not as often as I used to.)



[Seriously, Galloway is really useful.]

Redheads are like unicorns.

Quasi human mutant freaks with a thousand times more neanderthal DNA that real humans?

> Because the Speaker doesn't get to dictate which
> laws pass. And more Congressmen voted for it than
> voted against it.

> We got the government we voted for. And we're
> going broke with it. That's on us, not him.

Or he realizes that a blue wave is coming in November, and this gives him a chance to plan a primary run against Trump.

But how could there be a blue wave when the Orange Fuckwit has enjoyed so very much "Winning!"?

Or he realizes that a blue wave is coming in November, and this gives him a chance to plan a primary run against Trump. ~ Snoopy at April 11, 2018 4:58 PM

I don't think there's going to be as big a blue wave as is being predicted. Blue collar, gun-owning voters are quite motivated to vote in this mid-term and mid-terms are all about getting the base out to vote.

Leaving the House in a mid-term election gives Ryan 2 years to prepare a presidential run without the handicap of actually having to vote on bills in those 2 years. That's 2 years to make speeches and appear on television as an expert. Ryan may be planning to challenge Trump for the Republican nomination in 2020, with an eye toward being a front-runner in 2024, if he can't upset Trump in 2020.

The Democrats' candidate in 2020 is going to be weak, based on who's on deck right now, so that would be the time to run.

No, I'd say some of that's on him. ~ Crid at April 11, 2018 3:59 PM

Of course some of it is on him, he's the leader of the party's Congressional delegation.

Keep in mind, however, that the modern Republicans have not been able to compel lock-step voting the way the modern Democrats have, which limits a Republican Speaker's ability to control a specific agenda.

Quoted by Darth:

"People who exaggerate the dangers to women aren’t heroes. They are the reason my grandmother had to give up her dreams."

https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/293438/
____________________________________

Interesting comments below.
______________________________________

Evi L. Bloggerlady • a day ago

Gail, if your grandmother went to Harvard/Radcliff you would not be here. So look on the bright side.
______________________________________

Not necessarily true in the first place, and even if it WERE true, non-existent people cannot have any sorrow or regrets.

And check this out:
______________________________________

ipencil • a day ago

Slaving away in an office, building a career through prime childbearing years, making it likely she never would have married, much less had kids or grandkids, is a "dream"? Seriously, feminists are fucked up. That's exactly the type of stupidity that causes you to think Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission is a hard case to decide.

Men aren't "privileged" to work. Men slave away in shit jobs they hate in order to have a support a family. Feminists see slaving away at shit jobs as more important than family. This leaves a lot of middle aged women single, childless, and bitter, who continue the cycle as bitter old women are the most vicious liars in our society, eager to inflict their misery on younger women.

Further, women, by and large, are going to college as luxury consumption status signalling and for assortive mating purposes, not as a means to further a career to support a family. Your pretentious preening on this topic is galling.
_________________________________________

Good lord. First, ever since stores made condoms easy to get without asking the cashier first, SMART single men have quite easily avoided premature marriage for decades. What's more, it's easier now than ever for men to say no to their PARENTS' wishes for them to marry, have children, or take jobs they hate to support a family. What's more, throwing away your options after high school just because you want to be a full-time homemaker is simply dumb. From an abandoned "happy housewife," in 1987: "Housewife is NOT a valid career option because you have no control over your own life. If you lose your husband you can't go down to the employment agency and apply for a new one!"

And, from Katha Pollitt's column in 2006:

"Believe it or not, there are still stereotypically male jobs that pay well and don't require college degrees--plumbing, cabinetry, electrical work, computer repair, refrigeration, trucking, mining, restaurant cuisine. My daughter had two male school friends, good students from academically oriented families, who chose cooking school over college. Moreover, as I'll discuss in my next column, sex discrimination in employment is alive and well: Maybe boys focus less on school because they think they'll come out ahead anyway. What solid, stable jobs with a future are there for women without at least some higher ed? Heather Boushey, an economist with the Center for Economic Policy and Research, noted that women students take out more loans than their male classmates, even though a BA does less to increase their income. The sacrifice would make sense, though, if the BA made the crucial difference between respectable security and a lifetime as a waitress or a file clerk."

Lets correct one thing right there. Boys focus less on school because they are discriminated against in school. When it is clear you can't win you move on to other things.

How do you know that's necessarily the top factor - as opposed to, say, dense PARENTS who wouldn't dream of letting their kids eat ice cream every day, but who don't think twice about allowing their sons to wallow in nothing but the instant gratification of video games once the schoolwork is done - and then act surprised when that hurts them in school? (I know at least two well-educated sets of parents like that - I hate to think of the problems they'll likely have later, when their sons are teens.)

Also, from the same 2006 Pollitt column:

"...I don't know where those pundits went to school, but education has always involved a lot of sitting, a lot of organizing, a lot of deadlines and a lot of work you didn't necessarily feel like doing. It's always been heavily verbal--in fact, today's textbooks are unbelievably dumbed down and visually hyped compared with fifty years ago. Conservatives talk as if boys should be taught in some kind of cross between boot camp and Treasure Island--but what kind of preparation for modern life would that be? As for the decline of gym and teams and band--activities that keep academically struggling kids, especially boys, coming to school--whose idea was it to cut those 'frills' in the first place if not conservatives?..."

She also hinted, at the end, that maybe a lot of boys resent being expected to do well enough academically to go to a good college when that used to be considered mainly "men's work," but nowadays, almost every middle-class girl is expected to go to college and learn to be financially independent - and even plenty of working-class girls as well, so boys find it hard to take pride in an area that will always include girls - unlike, say, football or Grand Theft Auto. But, that should be THEIR problem, not the teachers'.

(I don't know how typical this was for working-class folk in 1972, but in an episode of "All in the Family" - it was "Gloria and the Riddle" - she gets a part-time job and Archie is angry about it because "a woman's place is in the home," even though she wasn't even pregnant at that time - and Edith was doing much of the housework anyway! So that made it clear why Gloria barely scraped out of high school; her parents never encouraged to get into college - and maybe didn't care much about her high-school grades either.)