Yet the incomprehensibly rich NFL team owners are busy crafting a neat little narrative for you, the fan: They need more of your tax dollars to build their lavish stadiums.
On his blog, which is closely followed by many people at Harvard, Dr. Lewis called the administration’s handling of the search “dishonorable,” and, like some of his colleagues, said the episode would prompt him to do less of his communication through his Harvard e-mail account, and more through a private account.
The concept of freedom of speech carries an implied corollary: the freedom to offend. Think about it; the whole point of the “freedom of speech” was to be able to say something that was uncomfortable. When it was instituted in the US Constitution, the assumption was that it would be our government that would be the one being embarrassed. Unfortunately, the recent and continuing revelations about the NSA by Edward Snowden don’t seem to have caused, well, anyone in the government to be ashamed. But the fact remains that the concept of freedom to say whatever you like is the freedom to cause offense, because the entire point was to be able to speak about uncomfortable truths. All the pressure of political correctness to avoid saying particular things due to racial, sexual, religious, or cultural sympathies is tearing down the very underpinnings of the lofty ideal enshrined in the top spot of our Bill of Rights.
For years, I have feared waking up to news that Iran has detonated a nuclear weapon in Israel. Obama has done nothing to ameliorate this fear. He’s only exacerbated it.
It’s weird, isn’t it? Here, we have a country which, weekly, vows to destroy Israel, and claims that nuclear weapons are their birthright. Yet, somehow, we let them continue to work on nuclear technology.
I understand that statecraft is a subtle art, but the bottom line is pretty clear here. Iran is Russia’s big oil supplier, but that’s going to be a thin excuse when the mushroom cloud appears.
Luckily, I think Israel will unilaterally do what is required to keep themselves safe. The question is what the rest of the world is going to do about it.
So I’m setting up a replacement computer for my church. I’m going to swap out a 15-year-old computer for a 7-year-old one, and I’m putting XP on it. It was a hassle getting Windows Update to run on it, and, now that it does, it’s the usual hassle. After hundreds of updates, I finally installed .NET 4.0 as an optional package, and now I’ve been waiting 20 minutes for its service pack to load, along with 15 other patches for it.
When Microsoft rolls XP off support next year, do you suppose there’s any chance they’ll make a final service pack that includes all known updates, to make this process easy for those that want to take the risk of running a no-longer-patched system? Yeah, I didn’t think so either.
The events of O’Keefe’s video of a Texas navigator site run by the National Urban League are a familiar sight to viewers of his past efforts exposing Medicaid and voter fraud. Government-paid workers supposedly trained to uphold the law advise clients on how to lie on government forms, evade legal requirements, and ignore proper procedures.
There was a screenshot of a FB post going around where some “liberal” was giving “what for” to a “conservative” for being against government assistance. The liberal was accusing the conservative of wanting to stave the old, the infirm, and the infants due to just a handful of people who might be gaming the system. This is a rhetorical device I remember starting with Clinton’s campaign, the language of which has now become part of the Democratic platform, and it’s just logic bomb designed to stop debate.
The problem, of course, is that we have a report like this, and it’s just like the ACORN scandal all over again. We see that there’s an entire sub-culture in America that is specifically organized to game various government assistance programs. This is the problem I have. It is incredibly offensive to me.
When government gets this big, and the programs involve this much money, does this become part-and-parcel? Must we have government paying a group of people to help navigate their byzantine systems? Even if this is true, why do we find, time and again, that they help people cheat the system? Is there no way to separate aid programs from fraud? Are we all just supposed to look the other way in favor of the “good” that is supposedly being done for the “truly needy” in these situations?
I have a couple of poignant examples of abuse of the system I’ve seen personally, but I’m sure the response would be that I’ve rubbed shoulders with lots more people than that who used assistance to get over a rough patch in their life, and didn’t defraud tax payers. I want to believe, but these exposés make it difficult.
I realized tonight that I still don’t know a lot of the lyrics to Duran Duran songs, despite the fact that they’ve been my favorite band for thirty-one years now. And I’m not talking about their new stuff. I’m talking about lyrics off their first, eponymous album, which I picked up after I learned of their existence through Seven and the Ragged Tiger. I suppose I leave myself in the dark, because when I have taken the time to lookup and clarify what a line was, it didn’t make any sense anyway.
De Blasio’s administration will be a laboratory of sorts for modern progressivism — testing whether an anti-establishment activist can effectively manage a sprawling municipal government and lessen growing inequality between the rich and poor.
There are two kinds of people: those who think that government exists to “lessen” “inequality” by redistributing success as handouts to the disadvantaged, hoping and praying that this will somehow change the environment and culture in which they are mired, and those who think that government ought to get out of the way so that the successes the first group is banking on will exist to begin with. Government is not a zero-sum game. There is a cost associated to this sort of “pie-redistribution” governance, and it reduces the overall size of the pie.
Through Steam, I own 101 games, all of which (of course) run on Windows. Of these, 61 are available on OS X. On Linux, only 39. The Valve console is supposed to run the missing triple-A titles by streaming the video and input to and from a Windows-based PC to the console, sitting in the living room. I don’t get it. If I need a Windows-based PC to run the games, why bother? Just moving to the living room and playing on my TV isn’t a “thing” to me. There’s got to be more to the story here. More and more big titles are coming to Linux (like this “Metro” that was just released), but it’s a long way to reach parity.
“Yes, its like something out of Minority Report, but this could change the face of British retail and our plans are to expand the screens into as many supermarkets as possible,” he said.
“Yes, this is exactly like that scene in that movie about a dystopian future we should avoid creating, but it’s going to be great for us to make money with!”