Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Use my Amazon Portal
Oh, brother. Where the hell did they get the idea that two beautiful people are destined to have beautiful babies?
creative way to get around China's one child policy? If he remarries does he get another shot at a son?
I think the article should've had a picture or the guy. Is he really so attractive? Certainly not where it counts.
Isn't this like a women divorcing a man because she found out he wasn't super wealthy (when she thought he was because he appeared to be)?
I saw this on FrasIer.
I know. My parents were surprised too.
Can't trust them damn Commies!
Sue for false advertising.
chickletits like a woman divorcing a wealthy man because she had a baby that turned out to be flat broke.
This will be fun reading for the little girl when she is a teenager.
Bwahahahahahahahaha!!!Such great vanity deserves such great payback. Poor kid, having parents so shallow and stuck on physical appearance.(Easy for me to say, being an incredibly handsome hunk with fabulously attractive kids.)
Damn good surgery, though.
It's just sad in so many ways.
Should have aborted that baby!
There...really is no redeeming value to this story. How awful! This must be why Chinese fairy tales aren't more popular.The Ugly Feng-Ling.Once there was a beautiful princess who gave birth to a monster.The prince could not believe this was his child. So he summoned the princess's fairy godmother, who told the prince that the princess was born a pig and was turned into a beauty at a young age.The prince then banished the princess and the child to hell.The end.
But, yes, another cheap Chinese knock-off of South Korean goods.
I hope he'll be a sport and set up a modest plastic surgery trust fund for his daughter. It must suck to be so ugly!
In my experience, the bugliest babies turn into the most attractive adults.
Mom should either start saving for the child's surgery now, or buy a copy of Marty with Chinese subtitles."看，像我们这样的狗，我们是不是这样的狗，因为我们认为我们是。"(Marty Pilletti: [to Clara] See, dogs like us, we ain't such dogs as we think we are.)
"In my experience, the bugliest babies turn into the most attractive adults."I dunno. I started out hideous and the needle never moved.
These two ugly idiots deserve each other. The kid could do so much better, though.
In 10000 years when we somehow die out and aliens come to visit this planet and send down their archaeological teams to dig sites all over the world, they are going to dig up our dead and all they will see is bones and the silicone implants right next to them and wonder what they are. That's all that will be left.
It's also true with many hollywood types. Seemingly beautiful people who produce just god awful ugly children. Yes, it's shallow, but there is a sense of justice to it all.
"In 10000 years when we somehow die out and aliens come to visit this planet and send down their archaeological teams to dig sites all over the world, they are going to dig up our dead and all they will see is bones and the silicone implants right next to them and wonder what they are. That's all that will be left."Then somehow, they will access our digital archives, see comments like this, and understand. :-)
Man who is very much a swine, thy name is vanity.
"Where the hell did they get the idea that two beautiful people are destined to have beautiful babies?"Aristotle, 'Physics' (II.3?), gives it as an example of the efficient cause.
99.4% of women in China are beautiful.[A recent survey reported that only 0.6% of women in China remove any body hair.]
This station picked up the story from the Irish Times. You have to love the Irish. Fucked up families are the norm for them. The only thing that cheers them up is laughing about how fucked up someone else's family is.
I missing something. It's my undiagnosed asperger's syndrome.When a guy walks around with the penis cut off from his nephew, it's all jokes and laughs.Here, it's some woman who cheated, got married, and upset her husband. Where are the jokes?
Father of the year!
"Where the hell did they get the idea that two beautiful people are destined to have beautiful babies?"Genetics. People tend to breed true to their genetic heritage, just the same as domestic livestock, cats or dogs. Will there be an outlier or throwback occasionally, but generally barring a genetic anomaly or defect in the genes, the breeding or heritage is similar to the parents.I agree with the false advertising claim. Something minor, like coloring your hair, plucking your eyebrows is quite different from completely rearranging your entire face and/or body to be something that it is not, never was and never could be.I feel sorry for the ugly kid with the plastic artificially constructed mother.
If he's all about beauty and he thinks his wife is beautiful he should just do for the baby what his wife had done and then they all will be beautiful in the same way. ie Not in reality, but in the plastic world where love depends on beauty and women get themselves siliconed up to satisfy that demand.
$120k in restitution ordered for her lies? Now that's an aspect of Chinese law I can get into!Yes, the surgery wasn't all that bad. Kind of amazing that a country as backward as China can manage to surpass our cosmetic surgery skillz. OTOH, Americans are perhaps anxious to show off the marks of the bs "status" that the surgeon's knife entails. In general, I can't stand the idea of plastic surgery. Unless you've been incredibly deformed, be yourself. Reducing yourself to an endlessly "perfectible" surface image is for Republicans. If only being a better person were encouraged in America, then maybe less attractive women wouldn't have so much to worry about.
Absolutely no surprise. I once had an employee who looked beyond average when she started the job. After many salaries increases she had many makeover beauty enhancements (face, nose, teeth, hair, etc).I often thought if she had kids they would never look like what she had become.
No words except sorrow for the child.
You are an attorney. Is this grounds for divorce?
Never marry someone you didn't know when he/she was 12.
Genetics. People tend to breed true to their genetic heritage, just the same as domestic livestock, cats or dogs. Will there be an outlier or throwback occasionally, but generally barring a genetic anomaly or defect in the genes, the breeding or heritage is similar to the parents.This is such a caricature it's laughable. Resemblance of a characteristic or two is one thing, but there is no heritable "beauty gene". You ever try Googling George Clooney's sister. Try it sometime. Try it with a host of celebrity beauty royalty. To the extent that symmetry provides an aesthetic sensibility, the genes for body plans are numerous and complex. I assume that if you'd start anywhere, and care to put any real biology behind it, you could start with the HOX (Homeobox) genes. There are at least 30 of them... that we know of. And the majority of variation probably relates less to allelic variants than to variation in regulatory elements surrounding the gene and the resulting level at which it is expressed. Good luck with that!(Although the opposite idea, that ugliness is heritable, did tickle my funny bone when imagining generations upon generations of less fortunate Americans with buckteeth, sparse facial hair (on both genders), and other manner of "Joe Dirt" attributes.
That man has an ugly soul.
just flush the thing down the lou.
This is such a caricature it's laughable. Resemblance of a characteristic or two is one thing, but there is no heritable "beauty gene"I didn't say 'beauty gene'. People and animals will tend to breed true to the genetics and the DNA that is dominant or if there is a double recessive you might get a surprise. If you have a familial tendency to weak chin or a Jay Leno style jaw, or if you have a genotype for certain skull shapes as known to forensic anthropology, then you will tend to pass those things onto your children in some measure.Ugly is in the eye of the beholder. Close set, crossed eyes and a flat skull was considered beautiful by the Mayans. This guy considers his child ugly and now that he sees what his wife actually looked like and what her genetic potential was, I doubt that he would have married her.Shallow. Maybe. But it is reality.However, when you do marry someone with the ultimate goal, whether you know it or not, to pass your genes onto the next generation, it would be nice to know that the advertising on the package you are being drawn to, is accurate and not a total fake out.
People and animals will tend to breed true to the genetics and the DNA that is dominant or if there is a double recessive you might get a surprise.Um, they will actually breed about 100% true to the genetics. And then there's the epigenetics, an increasingly probable Lamarckian revival. The problem is that people assume there is one gene to every trait, especially every single physical trait that humans identify as such. In reality, there usually is not. It might actually never be the case.If you have a familial tendency to weak chin or a Jay Leno style jaw, or if you have a genotype for certain skull shapes as known to forensic anthropology, then you will tend to pass those things onto your children in some measure.Ok..... But the problem is that there is no such thing as a "chin" gene. Dominant/recessive is a very simple (and actually, rare) form of interaction between alleles. The reality of how actual genes, and not just allelic variants, interact, is much more complex.
OK, I've had it. I'm done with 'em. They are just too dangerous to have around.I'm now announce that I'm gay. Celibate, but gay. So don't even think about sashaying that thing in front of me. I ain't crazy. So now if some woman claims to have gotten me to do something stupid, you know she's lying.Besides this has to expand my freedom to hate most people with impunity, which is a real plus.
"But the problem is that there is no such thing as a "chin" gene."Nobody said there was. Jesus, Ritmo, stop desperately trying to show off how SMART! you are for once. Oh, and try to stop being such a complete asshole.
Besides this has to expand my freedom to hate most people with impunity, which is a real plus.Did it ever catch on with that exalted hate-riotic patriot, Breitbart?
Jesus, Ritmo, stop desperately trying to show off how SMART! you are for once. Oh, and try to stop being such a complete asshole.What makes you think that DBQ finds informative discussions something that only assholes engage in? I think she rather enjoys that sort of thing. She was the one to bring up an extensive genetics angle to it. Just saying.
But the problem is that there is no such thing as a "chin" geneNot an exact one gene per trait of course. However, tell the Habpsburgs that there isn't a genetic component to their familial trait. Genetics is rather complicated and of course there isn't a one to one, sure thing relationship. However, you cannot deny that people tend to produce children who look similar in some ways to the rest of the family***, mother, father and siblings being a blend of both. This is why it was such a surprise to this guy. He married a woman who looked like 'this' and expected that their children would somewhat faintly resemble the person that he thought he knew.*** Except of course for the proverbial red headed step child or the kid who bears a suspicious resemblance to the UPS man. :-)BTW: I'm interested in this genetics stuff since my mother was colorblind and I am waiting to see in my grandson is also.
Ok..... But the problem is that there is no such thing as a "chin" gene. Dominant/recessive is a very simple (and actually, rare) form of interaction between alleles. The reality of how actual genes, and not just allelic variants, interact, is much more complex.Uh, OK, but that doesn't change the fact that good-looking people, on the whole, tend to have good-looking kids. Unless they're really ugly people who got good-looking through surgery.
"Vanity, definitely my favorite sin." - John Milton, The Devil's Advocate
always check her mother
I think the problem with emphasizing the heritability of beauty (an inherently subjective thing) over the heritability of traits, is that some work well in some people, and not so well in others. Some work well in women and not in men. And vice versa. I think of a woman I dated whose lips had that Julia Roberts/Marge Simpson thing going for them. Skinny, but light and long. Until I realized that she got them from her dad. That sort of changed how I looked at it, or at least how I wanted to look at it.Admit it! That's a very generalizable thing among families. Admit it.
"Did it ever catch on with that exalted hate-riotic patriot, Breitbart?"Are you threatening me. Because if you are, I kinda like it. I'm gay now, so watch your ass with me.
Are you threatening me. Because if you are, I kinda like it. I'm gay now, so watch your ass with me.It must be like how I always thought I'd be catching a twinkle in Mr Mittens' eye just as he let slip another whopper.
We need a carfax from women.
You can outsource me anytime, Bag. And I will love you all the more for it. I will lead company retreats where we hang banners of our leader and sing his praises. Just do me a favor and try to set up a shop on Socotra or something. Or an island off the coast of Thailand. China never did anything for me.
We need a carfax from womenLOL Good one Lem.
Ritmo, I live and work in California. I know intimately about the effect of leftist ideas like yours. I have watched my competitors wiped out one after another by Chinese importers. I'm just too stubborn and hired a couple dozen more Americans this year again. I've also been in a number of far east countries talking to the foreign business men there who take our jobs by the millions. They love people like you, and they wish you success. In fact, they are betting on it. You are the outsourcer with every vote, and every thing you support. Congrats! it's working.
Lawsuits I hope will fail? Does she get to appeal this in China?
You just contradicted yourself by admitting to hiring a couple dozen under an administration that you claim is increasing outsourcing faster than it occurred under the Republiconfederates who feel that a Chinese sweatshop provides the ideal working conditions to aspire to competeing with.Make a product that they can't. Work harder for a change. To make the same income next year, you'll have to.And the debt could use about a $40 billion payment. Your contribution will be much appreciated. You lost an election. You couldn't, and can't convince 70% of the electorate that they're lazy for understanding that the burden on them is higher than it is on you.And, finally, in the spirit of Paco, it was a fucking joke I was making in the first place. Getting over yourself might take some effort, but I'm sure that you'll soon understand that you're not the center of the universe. Paul Ryan's still rubbing salt in your wounds now, but the Ayn Rand economy crashed before it ever got off the ground. Not that it ever would have.
This is such a caricature it's laughable. Resemblance of a characteristic or two is one thing, but there is no heritable "beauty gene". That's only half true. Beauty is more universal that people like to admit, and it has a lot to do with symmetry. Supposedly people can detect facial asymmetries as small as a millimeter or two.
Ritmo, I'm succeeding mostly because I have no competition left in the U.S. Sure that's great for me, but not the country. I'd prefer to have more domestic competition to share the tax burden with. That's probably beyond your simplistic, clean hands understanding. I don't expect you absorb it. I just thought I'd put the truth out there for you in case you were inclined to consider it. You are under no duress to do so. I'm sure you'll be fine.
Well, to an extent, Eric. Bush's eyes show probably no less horizontal symmetry than most people's. But they were too damn far apart. I guess humans aren't striving to revive the monocular vision thing, so common to reptiles, in their genome any time soon.
Bag: Quick trivia question.Under which president has manufacturing increased to a greater degree in America? Bush or Obama?Which president would have done this under much more difficult conditions, thereby necessitating greater praise?Which president grew more public sector jobs at the expense of private sector jobs? Bush or Obama?The problem is that all the over-simplified Republican sloganeering is something you've actually bought into. Yes, we need to change a lot of things, but they won't happen under Republicans. Republicans made the mess, they blamed it on their successor, and they only care about messaging, and only to the extent that it gets them power. If it's relegated to the top - that's fine with them, they could care less. They'll lie and pretend and fake concern for everyone else, (as will you), but that won't get America anywhere anymore.You can only market so much. Just ask yourself why people aren't buying the messages that came from a party that didn't even realize that angry, white men are no longer a growth market. There is no realism left there. And it's not good for your business.Admit that you did well and that the way for America to do better is not by replicating economic policy as it stood from 2001 - 2008. It's just not a good idea. The people aren't as stupid as you take them to be. And they rightfully have, and have a right to, more self-respect than you are able to see in them.
Rosemary: What have you done to it? What have you done to its eyes?Roman: He has his father's eyes.Rosemary: What are you talking about?! Guy's eyes are normal! What have you done to him? You maniacs!Roman: Satan is his father, not Guy. He came up from hell and begat a son of mortal woman. [Coven members cheer 'Hail, Satan!'] Satan is his father and his name is Adrian. He shall overthrow the mighty and lay waste their temples. He shall redeem the despised and wreak vengeance in the name of the burned and the tortured. Hail, Adrian! Hail, Satan! Hail, Satan!Rosemary: Oh, God! Roman: God is dead! Satan lives! The year is One, the year is One! God is dead!
Ritmo ASSERTS:beauty (an inherently subjective thing)Studies have shown that there is surprising agreement about what makes a face attractive. Symmetry is at the core, along with youthfulness; clarity or smoothness of skin; and vivid color, say, in the eyes and hair. There is little dissent among people of different cultures, ethnicities, races, ages and gender.
Ritmo asserts many things almost 100% are bullshit. It's genetic I hear.
Oh geez. Dante echoes Eric in failing to read what Ritmo already stated regarding symmetry in his 7:52 post. And wyo just has anger so out of control that she needs to create a devil-person to channel it effectively. But yes, reading might help her, as well.
Maybe the problem is that some people don't have a sense of balance for their context. Symmetry is one thing, but it's still just one thing. A sphere is perfectly symmetrical; suffice it to say people won't be pining after mates with perfect sphere-heads anytime soon. And cubes exhibit a great deal of symmetry, as well. And yet, Frankenstein doesn't seem to represent the standard for beauty, either.But you binary thinkers got a simple, rule-based, mathematical answer and thus it becomes the answer to end all answers. Hallelujah. And hail Karl Rove.
Ritmo the Genius says:A bunch of gobbldigook trying to make his golden god look good.Here is something, Ritmo.There is a fixed capacity for health care in this country. It's probably not very elastic. I do not know at what percentage it is operating today, but probably to get it to produce more is going to do what usually happens in economics: when the demand increases, and the supply remains the same, costs go up. This is a simple equation that has been known for years.Your Golden God has decreed he is going to create more consumers of healthcare. Genius, what's going to happen?Where are the "Million Jobs" Nancy Pelosi promised the minute health care was passed?And please, tell me ONE THING the government has done more efficiently than private, competing corporations?The Roads suck, the Schools suck, Police and Fire, at least here in CA, are a massive ripoff. Welfare rolls are surging. The productivity of the current generation isn't enough: it has to borrow from future generations to pay for the profligate waste.And you Democrats have been completely ineffective in obtaining welfare dollars from the wealthy. The top 400 most income rich people in the country paid 17% in income tax, yet massive programs are run regressively on the middle class, including:OBAMA phonesSocial Security/AKA Welfare DisabilityHome gas taxes (by using tiers)Water Taxes (ditto)Electric Taxes (ditto)Sales taxesand even Property taxesThe highest marginal rate on income is over 50% for those having their deductions phased out for FEDERAL taxes alone, and the effective rate is roughly 33% - 36% federal in 2010 depending on how you count.You and your bleeding hearts have let in massive numbers of welfare recipients, much to the benefit of the ownership class, who take jobs, clog roads, and flood parks. These people and their progeny as a whole, not as individuals, pay and will pay vastly less in income taxes than they will consume. I do not blame these people for seeking a better life. I blame Democrats. At least Republicans have an excuse. I want profit, I'm a wolf, don't put a chicken in front of me and expect me to not eat it. Which means they will be subsidized. Which means yet again your leftist policies have hurt the middle class.You and your ilk are pushing a two tiered society, of wealthy donors who are protected by government, and in my guess get a net RETURN on their government investments, and stick it to the middle class.It makes me sick. I'm tired of being a milch cow for people that cannot think, cannot add, and cannot see the reality. That do not understand despite the trillions spent in programs, the POOR are still POOR, and there are MORE OF THEM.And you come here and try to argue with Bagoh? A man who employs many people, giving them jobs and livelihoods?I don't get it. What have you done that's so great, besides try to tear down the people how have made this country great? What?
Dante, u mad bro?
Wyo Sis, why do you pick on my little buddy Ritmo?
When you don't really know anything first hand, you can always rely on statistics, studies, and other third hand attempts to figure out what people like me already know first hand. There is one out there for any point you want to make.Everything I said went right over your head, and nothing a real person knows will ever effect you. For me, it's just not interesting to talk to people who have nothing personal to add. I have my own Google.
Dante, u mad bro?It's frustrating seeing the lack of accountability. There isn't enough money? My god, how much does it take?
Oh geez. Dante echoes Eric in failing to read what Ritmo already stated regarding symmetry in his 7:52 post. You mean that empty "Oh it's too complex post?"Maybe you didn't read the article I linked to, which discusses a study in which a COMPUTER PROGRAM TAKES WOMEN, ADJUSTS THEIR PICTURES TO A FORMULA, AND OUTPUTS MORE BEAUTIFUL WOMEN.See, it adjusts a picture based on formulas, and 95% agree the adjustments make the woman more beautiful.
Dante, I don't live in California.And if you are wondering where your federal dollars went, here's a hint: They went to Red States.Sorry to ruin your nightmare with some, you know, facts.
"There isn't enough money? My god, how much does it take?"If you have ever tried to help someone who can't control their spending and has run up their debt and credit cards to near ruin, then you know the mentality with the excuses and elaborate scheming that is developed to explain away why they must still spend a little more to fix the the problem, and how cutting back is just not an option. It's also a lot like those hoarders who can't throw anything out, no matter how disgusting or useless. I hear the same kind of stuff from the left lately. Everything is their favorite teddy bear. Nothing can be cut. We just need to find more money in a stagnant economy.
When you don't really know anything first hand, you can always rely on statistics, studies, and other third hand attempts to figure out what people like me already know first hand. Famous last words last said by a guy named "Karl Rove". The silly sycophant now has a lot of big spenders wayyyy pissed at him. Probably not a good model to follow. Believing your own bullshit is an endeavor with diminishing returns. There is one out there for any point you want to make.And it can be rebutted. And except when congressional Republicans asked for studies to be withdrawn than to actually consider them. You go ahead, we'll leave the endless competition to you. But the grown-ups need to end debates and arguments with conclusive, objective evidence. Everything I said went right over your head, and nothing a real person knows will ever effect you. For me, it's just not interesting to talk to people who have nothing personal to add. I have my own Google.But you don't know how to interpret the results. Don't worry, a computer will help you with that some day. And in a way that makes you more compliant and docile than when a human like myself gives you the same answer it would give, as above.
Ritmo, when you learn something you didn't read third hand from the internet, I'll consider you as a source. Do actually have any real life experience at all? How do we know you even live on this planet?
Everything is their favorite teddy bear. Nothing can be cut. We just need to find more money in a stagnant economy.You are either a liar or you need to read what the "actual left" did, not what you "heard". Paul Ryan bitched about the $700 billion your president took out of Medicare. And also, where's your take on defense cuts? We know that Republicans defended the opposite, over the objections of the Pentagon. The Pentagon! They objected to increases, and Paul and Mitt said, go have at it.Do you even know what the breakdown of the budget is? I bet you don't. All you know are talking points. You don't care about facts. For those who do, the breakdown is Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and Defense. Only one party has cut Medicaid. The right protests because it ends up saving the program. Either that, or they object to anyone doing anything effectively - it makes Republicans look bad.Next up is defense. Where's Bag on that.So despite the fact that we can easily divvy up the four components of the budget that mean ANYTHING, you won't find Bag O' anywhere to be found on what needs to be cut, and where. Just like Romney. Hypnotically repeat a mantra, and don't deliver a damn thing. Just bitch about how you are too rich to have it good, like the poor.Whatever.
It couldn't have happened to a nicer guy, Karl Rove. :)
A man who believes the ability to consider information objectively is a liability, is a fool - and one who shouldn't, and won't, be taken seriously on problems of the magnitude that vex him so.Just stick to the chest thumping and performance art. People who have more to lose than you do are right not to take you seriously. It's like a guy who refuses to take his kid to a doctor because he can't abide by the medical jargon and technical mumbo jumbo.You just go ahead and stick your fingers in your ears and you will get what you deserve.
And if you are wondering where your federal dollars went, here's a hint:The stats at that page mean very little. Take tiny Alaska: put up some big military bases, and suddenly federal expenditures are going to soar.Also, it's a harbinger, isn't it? There are very few people who don't think they deserve it. How much do they deserve? All of it.
Little Buddy Ritmois a tool who comes here for the express purpose of inciting flame wars. He'll take the opposite side of anything anyone asserts. He does this to support his need to dominate and ridicule. I try not to feed it, but honestly, he's such a relentless asshole it gets to be too much sometimes.
Paul Ryan bitched about the $700 billion your president took out of Medicare.No, he complained about the double counting.
"All you know are talking points."Read the comments here. Mine are real life person accounts. You're the one spouting talking points you found on line - how novel. As for cutting, I understand the political bullshit involved, so I say cut everything. There is nothing to fight about if we cut it all. Then you are simply either on the side of cutting or you are not. There is nothing else to fight about. Yes, defense too. As someone who has personally turned around failing organizations more than once, I know that when the issue is serious, cutting across the board is always possible, and desirable. I wouldn't ask what should we cut or not cut, but what can we cut most? Got any suggestions?
No, he complained about the double counting.That's not the way he said (or "marketed") it.Keep arguing about how Alaska (and the military) needs every little bit of federal welfare that it gets and you'll be well on your way to understanding why Republicans got trounced for denouncing the "hand-outs" that they can somehow only see OTHERS taking.He'll take the opposite side of anything anyone asserts.Assert something correctly for once and we'll see how that works out.But you're used to being pandered to by a group that hasn't done anything right in 15 years and blames all their failures on their competition. So I can see why that might be a difficult thing.
"People who have more to lose than you do are right not to take you seriously."What is all this you have at stake, what will you lose? I'm very concerned.
Anyway this has deteriorated like it does. I already know what's coming, before I even refresh. Like I said, I have Google too.
Got any suggestions?Yes. And very simple ones. (Although neither you nor I have worked in budgeting the federal gov't, I assume you're making an exception here on whether we're permitted to talk about it).Cut them all across the board, but don't propose or pander to get rid of a single one. It's divisive and just done for political reasons, as it won't happen. That should be a good start right there.Raise rates at the very top. Leave 98% of households alone. Cut the deductions that Romney said the middle class need not worry about. And leave it at that. The president will get it done. There is no additional office or term for them to seek to deprive him of. They can and should work to do all that.
Keep arguing about how Alaska (and the military) needs every little bit of federal welfare that it gets and you'll be well on your way to understanding why Republicans got trounced for denouncing the "hand-outs" that they can somehow only see OTHERS taking.I don't know what you are talking about. I said it was OK? I don't have a clue about the ins and outs of defense. I'm making the obvious point that if you take a state with a small population, add military personell and sites, it's going to have a big multiplier effect.Is it worth it? How the hell should I know?When it comes to programs, that's a different matter. Many of these have been sold as ways to lift up the disadvantaged. But they don't, the programs continue to grow and the results are not only poor, but they push the country in the wrong direction.See, unlike Liberals I believe that almost everyone in the world comes from a long, long line of survivors. People who figured out how to live. To hear it from Liberals, these people are alive only because they are robbing the next generation into slavery.And think about the curve! The future not only has to pay for their programs, but ours too. Where is all that productivity going to come from? Due to liberal policies, the vast majority of the wealth is locked up by a tiny percentage of people, and most people are net negative due to the debt the federal government incurred on their behalf. Even if they aren't even born yet.
Her plastic surgeon worths every cent. He/she is a much better surgeon than those extreme priced ones in Hollywood.
And if you are wondering where your federal dollars went, here's a hint: They went to Red States.That's what blue states want, isn't it? I mean, it falls right out of the progressive tax code.
Admit that you did well and that the way for America to do better is not by replicating economic policy as it stood from 2001 - 2008. Things were fine until the Democrats took control of the House in 2006.
I know that when the issue is serious, cutting across the board is always possible, and desirable.I've heard this before, and it has the desirable idea that "Hey, we got here somehow, and so that reflects the balance, let's cut equally across the board."However, I don't agree with it. There are some things that require a threshold. If you can't afford the threshold, then nix it.The problem is it isn't "Fair." But it is more optimal.
... running, ironically as it turns out, against the "culture of corruption".
Things were fine until the Democrats took control of the House in 2006.The country was running high on the housing bubble, which was started by Barney Frank, and which the likes of Goldman Sachs and others took full advantage of.Goldman Sachs should be out of business. Their workers should be digging ditches, every one of them down to the secretaries, right along Barney Frank who ought to be in chains.There used to be a time when reputation was important. What happened to that?
Democrat thinking. After spending the Social Security Trust fund on Programs, here is there answer:But Mr. Reid said Democrats have already made changes to Medicare as part of President Obama's health law, and said Social Security is solvent for the time being and shouldn't be tapped to pay for other government needs. http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2012/nov/14/reid-takes-social-security-off-table/#ixzz2CGi4KkTVFollow us: @washtimes on Twitter
bagoh20 said... OK, I've had it. I'm done with 'em. They are just too dangerous to have around. I'm now announce that I'm gay. Celibate, but gay. So don't even think about sashaying that thing in front of me. I ain't crazy. So now if some woman claims to have gotten me to do something stupid, you know she's lying. Besides this has to expand my freedom to hate most people with impunity, which is a real plus.Now that you are gay, what sort of protections are you going to go for first?
That's my definition of quality plastic surgery.Well, not really. I wonder how much of the before & after improvement is just the makeup and presentation.
Ritmo spouting OWS talking points. Leave us 98% alone? Hilarious.
Who was the president who forced banks to make high risk loans to people? Why...Wait for it...Mr. Tax hike that ultimately killed the boom. Bill Clinton.But don’t you just love him anyway. He’s so folksy.
Hey Ritmo - an on-line game just for you.Soak the Rich!Fun for all ages.
Where is the evidence the husband was actually handsome?
Plastic surgery or no, "It's momma's baby, papa's maybe."
Here is an article (in Spanish) with a photo of the husband at the top:http://www.abrelaboca.com/denuncia-mujer-hijo-feos-china/I don't know about you, but he sure doesn't look like Mr. Hollywood to me!!!
George Bernard Shaw as supposedly approached by a beauty of his day who proposed that they marry. "Think of how wonderful our children will be with my beauty and your intelligence." His response was "And think of the poor creatures if works out the opposite." That GBS knew how to throw out a zinger. But he didn't have to deal with surgically enhanced women.
Marriage contract invalid due to failure of consideration.
Post a Comment