May, 2016 archive
Jose Ortega y Casset:
Having dutifully paid my child support, I have mixed emotions about this.
He was ordered to pay €300 in child support for the couple’s daughter each month as part of the divorce settlement, and the professional pizza chef chose to make the payments in the form of delicious pizza – something his ex-wife was not happy about.
According to the rest of the story, one factor affecting the judge’s ruling was that the man does not make enough money to pay the full cash amount.
Werner Herzog’s Bear looks at the news and hazards a guess:
Follow the link and find out why he says that (and, no, the Republican Party will not admit that “they are indeed the White Man’s Party”; “plausible deniabilty” will be maintained).
I say that there is no way to explain away the racism in this, but I predict they will keep trying.
I’m a Southern boy. I see through racists’ bullshit because I grew up surrounded by it.
Politeness is essential to domestic tranquility.
A half-dozen police cars and emergency vehicles lined the 2000 block of Carroll Avenue. About 45 minutes earlier, a 10-year-old boy shot an 11-year-old boy, the woman’s son, with a handgun they found inside the house, police spokesman Scott Leamon said.
The two boys had been playing with the gun. The 10-year-old called 911 at 12:18 p.m. to report the shooting, Leamon said.
Just another day in NRA paradise.
I really don’t want to know what it means when you’re on a bike ride, stop for a drink of water, and look up to see a turkey buzzard circling above your head.
Not at all.
Robert Green Ingersoll:
The question is not whether, it’s when: When will some boy bring down an airliner with his toy?
He was turning right at an altitude of 450 metres (1,500ft) – a “critical phase of flight” – when the incident occurred.
The report stated that the drone was “extremely close to the aircraft”, passing just 15 metres above and 30 metres to the left.
Bob Molinaro spots a sporting twit:
In a long, thoughtful post at the Boston Review, David Sehat analyzes the history of conservative Christians’ assertion that that “freedom of religion” means “freedom to discrimination”; he concludes it’s about power, not piety.
A nugget (emphasis added):
But once Christian conservatives realized that they were not, in fact, in the majority, they turned RFRA (the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993–ed,) into a weapon. Complaining of a war on religion, they sought exemptions to otherwise-applicable laws. They also began to pass religious freedom acts on the state level, even before the Court’s rulings on gay rights in Lawrence and Obergefell. An extensive 2006 New York Times report found that, thanks in part to state-level RFRAs, religious organizations across the nation enjoyed exemptions to laws dealing with taxes, immigration, discrimination, employment, pensions, child care, and land use, among other issues. The objective has been to carve out ever-widening swaths of life in which places of worship, hospitals, schools, daycare centers, and—with the Supreme Court’s ruling in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores (2014)—for-profit businesses no longer have to abide by generally applicable law, if they can make a claim on the basis of religious freedom.
It’s a con, perpetrated those who believe that there is no such thing as the public good.