It says it is from the PJ Tatler. Their motto on the banner says: "To
pull off the disguises of cunning, vanity, and affectation"
The whispering face already says it is a spoof. To me that means it is
meant to be funny, but I don't find it so.
I sure looks legit and I think the "pull of" refers to the pretenses of those
In any case, here is a comment from someone who spent their career in government
for a private conversation we had:
LIRR personnel had something like that going too. google "lirr
retirement scam". They got caught. As they should be. And all like
that. See, if people just look out for themselves, sometimes it is NOT
for the best of everyone.
You're conflating apples and railroad ties. There is nothing wrong -
not morally, ethically, and not legally - of looking out for our
own interests. That is EXACTLY the idea the US was built on. It is
EXACTLY what makes the US different, more successful, and better than
the social(ist) democracies and other collectivist states around the planet.
What is not OK is "looking out for yourself" when the action requires you to
harm others - say by using fraud, force, or threat.
The idea that I exist to serve someone else at the point of your gun - the
central idea of all leftism - is a moral outrage.
Tim Daneliuk email@example.com
Sorry. Just drawing attention to the possibility that looking out for
oneself sometimes goes to enriching (or something like that) oneself to
the detriment of others. If you say that isn't possible, or at least not
done, I applaud the self improvement of the people you are talking about.
I am leftist, to an extent, but I wouldn't force anyone to do something
they feel they shouldn't. That excludes people who don't want to pay
into insurance funds because a tiny fraction of the benefits would go to
something they don't subscribe to.
Sometimes but by no means always. That's the trouble with the Left
wingnut point of view -- they think like the economy is a zero-sum
game, that the only way one person gets richer is if someone else gets
I used to belong to a professional organization, but quit when the
organization, which to my mind should have been apolitical, began using
my dues to support political causes I disagreed with.
That leaves me confused. Do you have something in particular in mind?
Yes, the problem is uncertainty. Until Obama is gone, business will just sit
on its hands (rather than being strangled with taxes and regulations). Without
Obama's anti-business (and anti-consumer) policies, the economy would have
taken off, all by itself, by now.
It's not just NY. Government is forcing jobs off-shore, too. ...but everyone
knows that (Democrats won't admit it, though).
Your rhetoric would be more compelling were you to support it with some
actual facts. Name specific regulations. Name specific policies.
Show how they are attributed to President Obama, not prior administrations
or the congress (who, after all, passed _all_ the regulations that get
codified as law). Show how the policies hurt or benefit consumers, the public
and/or business. Noting that legislation, such as the clean-air act, may
cost business more $$, but improve the life of the public; show that the
harm to the business outweighs the benefit to the consumer or citizen.
But, you won't. You'll just ditto conservative commentators and resort to
calling behavior, as is your wont.
1. Name specific regulations
Just yesterday, in a ruling by the US Court of Appeals for the District of
" 'EPA has used the good neighbor provision to impose massive emissions
reduction requirements on upwind states without regard to the limits imposed
by the statutory text,' the court said."
2. Policies that hurt or benefit consumers
Irrelevant if the regulations are not in compliance with the law. Good
intentions or good outcomes are flawed if they are illegal.
3. Offensive name calling
Studies show that "liberal" or "progressive" sites have 18 times more
profanity than their opposite number.
And here I thought it was the combination of naysayers in the House
especially that kept Simpson-Bowles from being even discussed. And the
same hi-faluting combo that said yes to the fiscal cliff proposal that is
NOW the big problem. Who to blame ...
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.