Quote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
Then how do you explain post 1673 by flowerseverywhere?
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
Then how do you explain post 1673 by flowerseverywhere?
Is the GOP the perfect instrument for my brand of conservatism? No, although even in its present state it’s head and shoulders above the alternative. I’m not so trapped in the Guelph and Ghibelline mindset that so many suffer from that I feel the need to defend everyone in one camp and attack everyone in the other.Quote:
Originally Posted by frugal-one
I will say that as a parent of a trans kid that I have little time or patience for either side of that ridiculous new branch of identity politics. Look at that imbecilic imbroglio currently playing out at the New York Times, for instance.
LDAHL, Which of the current republican party priorities are you such a fan of?
I like that they want to gain some measure of control over the southern border. I think setting up a Select Committee on the CCP was a good idea and long overdue. I know people are whining about how they “want to investigate every little thing”, but I think there is no shortage of abuse out there that could stand a little scrutiny. Everybody clapped like seals when the president called the big entitlement programs inviolate, but something will need to be done before long or they will go insolvent. I don’t see the Democrats doing anything about that. I liked that they worked to block that egregious new criminal code for DC. From what I am reading, they are looking for ways to keep the Executive Branch from exercising powers not granted it by the Constitution such as the ridiculous student loan giveaway.Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1
As always, I’m guardedly optimistic about the future.
I noticed in today's news that the GOP is putting together an energy package what the news claims as their first big agenda item. It seems to have the trade mark of old school GOP fossil fuel encouragement, like opening up more public lands for oil development and renewing any keystone XL line efforts. Of course it has little chance of passing in the current regime, but I suppose they would like to keep the effort alive as a campaign issue since no one like expensive gas. In my biased view of things, human caused climate change denial, or at the best lip service, is the second big lie of the GOP.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/0...icans-00085415
I wonder if voters were offered the choice of SS and Medicare cutbacks, or an across the board tax increase, which the voters would choose?
I don’t think you need to be a climate change denier to recognize the foolishness of scrapping sources of energy before the replacements are available.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogar
Scrapping and refusing to expand are NOT the same thing.
I don't think it's quite that simple. There are fossil fuels replacements at a cost, and there is a cost with not doing anything about climate change. For those who don't recognize there is a problem or that it's not important, the solution will probably be very elusive.Quote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
I almost laughed out loud. Like the t shirt a woman wore in my local grocery store that said Trump is my Jesus? About people quoting the Christian bible to prevent abortions, morning after pills And some contraceptives? All the while advocating for the death penalty?Quote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
About demonizing women and subjecting them and their children to poverty while child support goes uncollected? Taking kids away from their parents because of their gender preferences?
I'm all for small government if schools, police, fire and healthcare are functioning well. But Our government, insurance companies, and Institutions are so bloated and full of consultants, managers, CEO's and so on things are totally out of whack. It runs across both parties.
Perhaps you didn't read the “ without messianic pretensions” part?Quote:
Originally Posted by flowerseverywhere
Seeing republicans in a variety of states (OH and PA for starters) are trying to reduce child labor laws. One was to let kids go into coal mines if it was as a possible career choice. Really.
So you don't appreciate the republican desire to romanticize the lifestyle of Oliver Twist? Personally I'm looking forward to the rollback of food safety rules so that we can relive Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle". Combine the two and you surely have a modern day capitalist's utopia!Quote:
Originally Posted by frugal-one
Now here's an interesting Republican:
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/10/o...can-party.html
I could get behind:Quote:
Originally Posted by bae
"But Mr. Massie’s lifestyle and brand of politics, the same brand that once marked him as a quirky outlier, have aligned with the current political moment — when many on the right and left are looking to pull back from the hyper-complex systems that govern the modern world, and move toward a more rooted way of life"
and
"The proposal that best shows his political vision is the PRIME Act, which would allow small farmers to process meat at local facilities, rather than at large slaughterhouses that have the funds to pay for a full-time, on-site U.S.D.A. inspector. This offers a way to sidestep a meat production system dominated by an oligopoly of four gigantic corporations whose environmentally destructive, deeply cruel processes barely resemble the act of farming as we once understood it."
and
"He suggested that it will be impossible for 'eight billion people on a finite planet' to build an ecological future while still maintaining our system of unrestrained material consumption."
Other things, not as much, but he certainly is an interesting Republican
Small farmers here go to local meat slaughtering facilities… that is nothing new or requires needed change?? USDA inspectors are not paid by private companies….definitely would be a conflict of interest. Sounds like this guy is just looking to push the “hot buttons” … to see what will stick?
BTW… Can’t read the article without signing in.
We get our beef processed at a small local place already. Not sure what this guy is crusading for.
Joel Salatin would like to be able to process his own beef.
https://a.co/d/ir01JxM
He's crusading for making it easier for local farmers to have their beef slaughtered locally, so that meat processors can better compete with the extremely destructive, inhumane, pervasive practices of the concentrated animal feed lots that, as he says, are owned by an oligarchy of six corporations.Quote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
You think everyone gets their beef slaughtered by small local businesses? 90% of eggs and beef come from CAFOs. They shut out the small processors.
Another “interesting” republican
Lauren Boebert is praising her son who at seventeen will be making her a 36 YO grandmother.
Hooray! A wonderful role model for our youth
https://people.com/politics/rep-laur...a-grandmother/
party of family values.
would you rather she publicly shamed him?Quote:
Originally Posted by flowerseverywhere
I doubt she thinks this is a good and smart move.
Why wouldn't she? He's only slightly younger than she was when she had him.Quote:
Originally Posted by iris lilies
Maybe, who knows.Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1
So much judginess for welcoming a grandchild. Gheesh.
How old are you supposed to be before you have a kid?
Quote:
Originally Posted by iris lilies
Indeed.Quote:
Originally Posted by iris lilies
[B]Dunno about supposed… but hopefully old enough to support and take care of it!Quote:
Originally Posted by bae
I have kin in Boebert territory. It's a whole other mindset over there.
If it's a valuing children mindset, I hope it spreads.Quote:
Originally Posted by pinkytoe
It seems much less concerning than some of her official activities.
I was born and raised in Boebert's voting district. A lot of it is just poor rural and small town America with a fairly large Hispanic population, but unusually diverse. It also includes Aspen and some exclusive tourist ski towns. It certainly doesn't compare to the third world rural areas in the south. I doubt she will survive another election. She was sort of caught up on the Trump era coat tails.
Teens know how not to get pregnant but certainly don't understand the long-term consequences of having a child at a very young age.
If the only sex ed they've been taught is the foolishness of "abstinence only" they may well not know how to not get pregnant.Quote:
Originally Posted by pinkytoe
At age 17? You want a run on 17 year old parents? Now that is sick.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
I'm very grateful to have been born to adult parents.
In the old days, it wasn't uncommon to have children at 18. Actually, my niece had a baby at 18. Her parents, with whom she has a very close relationship (she was living with them at the time) didn't even know! My SIL suspected. My brother got a call at work summoning him to the hospital where he learned that he had become a grandfather! There is nothing "wrong" with my niece and she raised her son and her other children spectacularly.Quote:
Originally Posted by frugal-one
I don't think there is anything categorically wrong with having children young; it does require a lot of support, though. I think it's interesting that the pendulum has swung and the trend is to have kids in your 30s and beyond so you can "live life" first and "save for a house" first and all that. Nothing wrong with that either, of course, but different strokes for different folks. My brand of "living life" was to have children in my 20s, and although I didn't wait to have kids until after I had enough money for a house, I wound up with a house anyway, and a bunch of wonderful kids to fill it.
Social rules can be so punishing.
No, I'm not in favor of 17 year old parents, but it happens despite mine or your wishes. Having gone through that myself when my 18 year old daughter gave birth I understand that the worst thing a parent can do is stigmatize the event and I refuse to do so for anyone in that position. That's a sickness we can avoid.Quote:
Originally Posted by frugal-one
Alan.. You helped your kid and, most likely, the gov subsidized them too. At 17, it is unimaginable that they could be self sufficient. The sickness is those who promote having children at 17 or younger.
I wouldn’t call it “promoting” so much as making the best of things that are real.Quote:
Originally Posted by frugal-one
What is the age of marriage in various states in the USA? And what is that age with parental consent?
Who is promoting it?Quote:
Originally Posted by frugal-one
I was out on my own and self sufficient at 17, my wife was in the same position at 18. My daughter was married at 18 and her husband was 19. They bought their first house when she was 20 and both have done very well. My mom was one month past her 18th birthday when I was born, my dad had just turned 21, it's not unimaginable.
When my paternal grandparents married, he was 17 and she was 14, they eventually thrived although he liked to remind her that during that first year or so of marriage, he nearly starved to death because when he came in from the fields at noon each day, she was was more often than not too busy playing with the neighbor kids to prepare lunch. So there's that.
How many years ago are you talking about, Alan? I seriously doubt a 17 year old could do what you describe today!Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
A kid in my daughter's high school class graduated pregnant. She was one of the top students. She got married before graduation, delivered after graduation, and she and her husband now have several kids, and a highly productive farm.
They had some family help in procuring the land for the farm, but built the house there and the outbuildings and barns with their own hands, and with $$$ they raised themselves. By the time my daughter had finished her Master's degree, these other kids were running a profitable and growing farm, and now have multiple children.
My own parents were ~19 when I was born.