From TIME this week:
“Eagle Pass, Texas, adopts a zero-tolerance policy called Operation Streamline, in which border agents stop sending migrants home and send them to jail instead. Colorado proposes paying prison inmates 60 cents a day to pick the peppers once harvested by undocumented workers.”
…which is why I find it strange that the backlash against him has just recently made headway. Or at least, the backlash against the backlash has recently made headway. And headlines.
I’m not from Connecticut and I’m not a registered Democrat, so my views on the matter are largely irrelevant, but let me try to spell it out for those who keep trying to simplify things: it’s not just the war. It’s that, like the President, he wants to increase funding in almost every level of government while somehow decreasing tax rates. It’s that, like the President, his support of the first amendment is shaky at best. It’s that he positions himself as an independent, innovative reformer, but doesn’t seem to have any original thoughts on the really difficult problems. It’s that he comes across like someone’s well-meaning dad at a PTA meeting who doesn’t appear to know what’s really going on.
I don’t know if this Ned Lamont fellow will be any better, but I won’t be sad to see Lieberman go.
Dear Washington Supreme Court,
I’m sure you are all wonderful justices, otherwise you wouldn’t have made to a state bench. But I would like you to explain to me your seemingly arbitrary conclusion that “limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples … furthers the well-being of children.” I also wonder how you decided that “further[ing] procreation” is a universally good thing when the global population is still rising, and when there are so many adorable starving babies out there still to be adopted. Now you probably have science on your side when you say that procreation is necessary to the “survival of the human race.” Sort of. But do you believe there are a significant number of people out there who are willing to marry and start procreating based on your decision?
“Well… on one hand, I love vagina. On the other hand, I really, really like wearing wedding dresses and filing joint tax returns.”
But mostly what I wonder is this: WHEN IN THE HELL DID THE SURVIVAL OF THE HUMAN RACE BECOME PART THE JURISDICTION OF THE WASHINGTON STATE JUDICIAL SYSTEM?
End letter.
I’m willing to accept that maybe the current wording of certain laws doesn’t allow for gay marriage. It doesn’t seem right to me, but I don’t know enough about law to hold an informed opinion. I’m even willing to accept that for some old people, homosexuality is a new and scary thing, like the Internet, and that we’ll have to wait for a few more of them to die before we can push through any serious legislation.
But I don’t understand and don’t accept people like Joseph Fuiten. I don’t understand how someone could spend so much time and energy opposing gay marriage, sending out letters and buttons and making speeches. I don’t get it. At best, he’s sticking his nose in an issue that doesn’t affect him in any way. At worst, he’s actively trying to prevent a group of people from finding happiness. They have a word for that type of personality in the comics world: supervillain. But instead of superpowers and a sense of humor, all Fuiten has is an outdated blog and a stick up his closet case ass where a cock should be.
And I don’t understand how people like him can complain about judicial activism and then applaud this silly ruling.
This morning’s Star-Ledger had a story about a Salvation Army employee who stole $385,000 from the organization over the course of many years. It included the following quote:
“During questioning by the prosecutor, Brown agreed that he had actually embezzled $59,000 that year but never reported it.”
So apparently the IRS doesn’t care if you embezzle money, as long as they get their cut.
Life imitates art. Or at least, life imitates Jennifer Love Hewitt movies.
Maybe you watched your parents fight when you were a child. Or maybe you had to deal with a boss who wanted to make your days miserable. Or maybe you just read newspapers. But at some point, everyone on this planet feels powerless.
And unless your name is General Gadi Eisenkot (the one from the Israeli army, in case there’s more than one), you’re probably feeling it now. I think we’re all feeling it now, every time we hear the words “missile,” or “terrorist,” or “Lebanon” (unless it is immediately followed by “Bologna”). An entire global population who feel that, with one misplaced bomb, or one pissed off world leader, the world just might come to an end, and there isn’t a damn thing we can do about it. That can’t be healthy, right?
Used to be the concept of shared experience related to family life. We all had a family right? Now the one constant seems to be fear. And frustration. Okay, that’s two, for those who are counting. But what can you do? What’s the alternative to sitting and hoping and trying not to let the shroud of global gloom suffocate you?
Flotsam in the HotSun 