May 3, 2019 6:40 AM
Morning Reads for Friday, May 3, 2019
- And September 7th will be a fine day to be in Athens, indeed.
- Who really expects Congress to do anything?
- Which hat should I wear?
- Make it stop.
- “It’s a beautiful thing, the destruction of words.”
- Warrentless searches increase. More than a smidge.
- Not just pretty, shiny things in the sky.
- Who doesn’t hate going to the dentist? (Sorry, you know who you are.)
- Don’t go in the water.
- Ok, now what?
- There is a great disturbance in The Force. (RIP Giant Walking Carpet)
- (added by Charlie) Hey! Grindelwald! Medicare isn’t free, and it IS means tested. Do Better!
About Author
Ginny
Get off my lawn.
12 Comments
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I think removing a giant painting of a dead Native American lying on the ground from a high school wall is totally appropriate, even if George Washington happens to be in the painting too.
Jade Helm would be a good name for the Rio Grande tiger.
This same thing happened when Republicans assumed political power in Georgia many years ago. Pols who are in office without ideological attachments jump ship.
https://www.gwinnettdailypost.com/local/danny-porter-to-seek-re-election-as-gwinnett-da-in/article_31e1bd14-6d27-11e9-85db-a378c1554d52.html
It’s the economy, stupid. Unemployment at 49 year low. Unemployment for women lowest since 1953. New lowest ever for Hispanics. By the Carville metric, Trump is assured re-election. His opposition has to get serious and offer a realistic alternative.
I can assure you they are.
A follow up. Trump may be a crude ass. He is, actually. Not debatable. But his economy is stellar. Not debatable. And all of the talk of Socialism from the opposition is bizarre. People in Venezuella are reduced to eating dogs. Thanks, Chavez/Mauro. And Trump’s opposition is advocating Socialist policies from the highest mountain. It’s not a winning formula for 2020. They have to know that. Right?
The economy was doing well in 2016, too.
The only real difference is that Republicans have started championing economic data and stopped calling it fake news. Fox News used to devote serious airtime to going “well actually” every time the Obama Administration released a new jobs report. Trump even claimed that the Obama Administration was “making it up.” I haven’t seen one Fox News host in the last two years mention how you can’t trust the unemployment number because it doesn’t count people who gave up on looking for work. Not one. The economy has been steadily improving for years now, this is just the first time Republicans are talking about it.
I’d note that, despite the “stellar” economy, Democrats still lost in 2016. Part of that is because stock market numbers and GDP growth don’t necessarily mean an improvement in the quality of life for the average American. We’re still seeing growth in income inequality, something Obama wasn’t able to tackle and something Trump has shown no interest in combating. That “drain the swamp” sentiment is still there. I think people are receptive to Warren, Sanders, etc. because they still feel the game is rigged, despite the economic “improvement.”
As a side note, I get the Venezuela reference because it’s currently in the news. But Venezuela’s issue isn’t socialism. Venezuela’s issue is that it’s a petrostate completely at the whims of fluctuations in energy markets. Canada is doing fine. Germany is doing fine. Sweden, Denmark, Norway are doing fine.
I’m not an economist but I did eat at Arby’s recently, so I can say this: If you look at this chart, Obama inherited a bad economy and turned it around, and was actually reducing the deficit. Generally a good thing. Even conservatives used to agree with that. But now you see , Trump inherited a pretty good economy, but is increasing the deficit anyway. I’m sure the theory is that strong enough growth will overcome the cost of tax cuts, but it hasn’t happened yet. The debt was already being reduced! Why screw with that? Trump bought this extra-strong economy with other peoples’ money (his standard modus operandi), and he’s already blaming the Fed and anyone else he can think of for the clouds on the horizon.
http://www.msnbc.com/sites/msnbc/files/styles/embedded_image/public/10.16.18.png?itok=XRkv8mqF
The Scottish Maritime Museum is full of sheit.
I feel like you fell for the trigger-bait on this one.
The article bemoans individuals and organizations using language they consider in their best interest– because they are just capitulating to a special interest agenda– all the while justifying the complaints upon their own special interest, which says that no one should change the language that they want.
I.e. If you agree with the language change, you are capitulating to the tides of political correctness. But if you disagree, and you just want the language the way you want it, well then, that standard is how you avoid the oppression of the special language interests.
Protip: Language evolves. People can evolve, too. There’s zero point in trying to be the morality police on an issue like this, especially if you have no direct experience on the issue (said without knowing any experience anybody might have with the Scottish Maritime Museum).
Triggered? Nah, I just commented because he/she/they/it’s stupid.
To co-opt the wisdom of that Socratic-like sage Jay-Z, “Scotland’s got 99 problems and pronouns on a plaque in a historical museum ain’t one.” Scotland is devolving politically(verdict not in) and devolved into a poverty ridden welfare state long ago.
This article has less to do with evolving language and more to do with catering to some “triggered” feminists who wouldn’t know port from starboard if the First Sea Lord whispered it in their, OOOPS, its ear.
I believe that I shall now ask the Deep Dark to change my username to Cisgendermaleremainingmalegendernonquestioning1raggedhole.
Too much?
Maybe I should just bracket my preferred pronouns going forward.
From the comments in the article;
“Ships are also referred to as “she” because, like women, they are very high maintenance.
That’s funny, I don’t care who you are.
Pretty extensive response for not being triggered, even just a little.
But regardless of how your response is characterized or experienced, it seems like you have real issue with gender neutrality in language. It can seem outlandish to many, particularly folks from older generations, or folks who don’t know anyone from the LGBTQ community.
The requested change in language need not reflect any knowledge in the underlying objects (like boats or whatever). For instance, you formed your opinion upon assumptions of what “the feminists” know, or don’t. All that may be relevant to them is that female characterizations are connected to an object, therein furthering a propensity to look at woman as objects. Just guessing, though.
I personally don’t think that last line is funny, though, because it doesn’t connect to my experience. Even when “high maintenance” was the language-du-jour, (circa 1988?), I didn’t connect it to all women or all men, or whatever. To do that would be to propagate an inaccurate and unhelpful stereotype.
But I also don’t begrudge you if you call a ship a female, nor begrudge anyone who advocates differently, or does differently, particularly if there’s an “official “position that must comprehends many opinions. So long as there’s some level of understanding and respect between the various holders of opinions, and the boats. (Male or female, or just things- the boats should still be treated right,)