Any “feel’ of what price ($/MWh) were they offering the energy to the utilities?
Anything about 100 $/MWh (10 c/kWh) would be completely uneconomical. That would still be about twice what renewable energy can be bought on a long term basis
So, I agree that R’s are eating it post-Roe, but the irony is that 15-weeks (i.e. abortion on-demand, largely as it is *practiced* today) is losing in the messaging wars as ‘extreme’. VA is 26-weeks plus exceptions (requires Doctors to sign-off after 26 weeks). That’s the delta 26 to 15. The number of Abortions that would be restricted by 26 to 15? Approximately 0
You are answering your our comment one paragraph above, when you say "15-weeks plus Exceptions is not seen as a reliable bet." It is not seen as a reliable bet because since the very first day Republicans have made it clear that those exceptions would be interprepeted in the most restrictive way possible.
Had Governors, legislators, district attorneys, etc., in those 15 or 6 weeks jurisdictions made claer from the beginning that every-single-borderline case should be interpreted as yes, an abortion is allowed in this case, or any case where doctors believe it's necessary, then, you are right, we would have been in Europe's territory.
But from the message has been so far: "Are you dying?" If not, then you do not need an abortion, and to have one will make your doctors -and you- criminally liable.
Only when the Texas, Florida, Georgia, etc. Attorney Generals publish guidance that indeed, the exceptions will be construed at least as liberally as in Europe, will people agree with shorter "abortion at will" windows. But so far, there are too many examples of "There will be exceptions, but this one is not an exception" cases.
As it's said in these comboxes frequently, look at what they do, not what they say.
Small nitpick, it’s not “by design”, a design that could be changed. It’s the physics of batteries that reduces the rate of charge as the battery is more charged.
To overcome that effect would require a staged charging system (essentially a series of chargers from small to big that take over as the battery charge exceeds certain level), which would be quite expensive. We use such a system to quickly fill out compressed gas vessels, which are subject to the same diminishing returns effect.
Having said that,the comment is accurate. That last 20% will take a long time
You mention the Apollo program and th3 COVID vaccines as examples of what we can do if we put our will, and resources, to it.
I want to add the Panamá Canal to it. Even after one hundred years some of the engineering feats, like the sluice gates, are unrivaled. To have built that in only ten years, and in the meantime to rid a country of endemic yellow fever by breaking out the transmission vector, is nothing short of mind blowing.
I strongly recommend David McCullough’s book The Path Between the Seas as the best and most complete narrative of that process
Good for you, you corrected my chronology, but reminding me that:
Poland expelled Germans into Germany
India expelled Pakistanis into Pakistan
Pakistan expelled Indians into India
Azerbaijan will probably expel Armenians into Armenia
And of course, Greece expelled Turks into Turkey, and Turkey expelled Greeks into Greece, and we are probably forgetting some others
However, after all this nitpicking you ignored the substantive question:
Where will Israel expel the Palestinians to/ Palestina?
The Palestinians to leave and go where? That’s where they were born. There’s nowhere they can go to. Expulsions worked in the XV or the XIX century, but not in these days of passports and nations.
Live as minorities how? Like blacks in the USA in 2023? It might not be great, but there’s formal equality, there’s voting, there’s a lot. Or as blacks in South Africa in the 1970s? Formal apartheid, for generations.
It is clear that Israel will always militarily win whatever war the Palestinians throws at them. Israel has to decide what the peace is going to be. And for whatever reason, they have never put forth what is Israel’s end plan.
There are two types of companies, which are financed completely differently. Most companies in real life are a mixture of the two types, but some pure examples do exist.
The first type are eternal companies, whose life is unlimited (not unlimited in a corporate sense -unlimited in the sense that they are [almost] free of obsolesce risk and therefore will be operating forever. Utilities are this kind of company. They show vegetative growth (as in customers mate and give birth to new customers that, once they reach maturity, sign their own contract with the utility). Utilities never pay their loans because they never lose customers or revenue. Quite the opposite, they grow permanently at a moderate but predictable rate, and keep getting new loans to serve the new customers. Banks love these companies because they are very low risk.
(As an aside, countries and governments are like this: taxpayers mate and have little future taxpayers. They never run out of a revenue source, so there's no need to pay the loans, just to roll them over, and take new loans to serve the new taxpayers)
The second type are companies with a limited life. They are based on a technology that changes a lot, or based out of assets that deplete or depreciate substantially (a mine, for instance, or a big smelter or refinery). These companies take big loans at the beginning of their life to cover the substantial capital expenditures needed to start operations, and have to amortize those loans in full before the underlaying assets are consumed.
(As a second aside, households are like this. They have a limited time (the work life of the parents) to pay for all their big purchases, like housing and education, and cannot extend the repayment past a certain moment. That is why comparisons between the government's budget and a family budget make no sense. We can discuss if taxes are too low or too high, but we can be sure that we are not running out of taxpayers.
In your particular case, TV cable is closer to a utility, so rollover of debts is likely the correct financing strategy
It's not tit for tat. The Dems are not Kingmakers. Gaetz is.
If the Democratic caucus saves McCarthy today what happens tomorrow? This is not Westminster, where a Sitting Prime Minister that survives a motion to remove him as leader is assured that no other motion can be filed for the next twelve months.
Even if he wanted to, McCarthy cannot offer anything -valuable or symbolic- to the Democrats. The moment he does, Gaetz will again move to vacate the chair, the Dems would need to save him again, and so on and on until he was gone.
If McCarthy had survived yesterday's vote with Democratic support, explicit or implicit, like the Democrats nor showing up or voting present, McCarthy's only option to remain as Speaker for more than another week would be to run as far away from the Democrats as he could, and show the Freedom Caucus that he had learned his lesson and that he was ready to play by their rules.
It is not that by not supporting McCarthy the Democrats sacrificed the long term interests of the country for the pleasure of kicking him when he was down. The only two possible outcomes were a motion to vacate Groundhog Day or for McCarthy to become completely and fully beholden to Gaetz and his pals.
The Republicans need to break the MAGA stronghold on the Party. Every action the Democrats may take to try to help moderate Republicans defeat the MAGA faction will only make it stronger.
That is a 100% true, and needs to be addressed. But the problem with guns and suicides is one of opportunity, and of perceived painlessness.
It is more or less agreed that the desire to commit suicide eases out significantly if the victim is unable to kill himself at that moment. Guns are deemed a fairly quick and painless way to kill yourself. Barbiturates are probably better, but more difficult to obtain. Jumping off a window is intuitively very scary and much less frequent.
But though I don't own any guns now, I can still buy one and kill myself before dinnertime this evening. If It was harder to get a gun -let's say 48 hours- there's a significant likelihood I would not kill myself. Guns not just replace other methods, they likely increase the total number of suicides, and that, too, is a problem.
Andrew Sullivan wrote a very good description of what the case for marriage is, and why marriage is a conservative institution. After 35 years I think it still holds
It must be a day that's not ending in "Y". I think this comment by Jaybird, to which I fully, 100% subscribe, describes exactly why poly marriages are not going likely to be a thing. And let me add another question:
D is A and B's biological child, and is born during the poly marriage. Is C D's parent? Does C get shared custody in case of a divorce?
People simplify poly marriage in their heads as "plural" marriage: one guy (gal) simultaneously married with several gals (guys). In Big Love, all the wives were married to Bill Paxton, but to each other (for a starters, there's no SSM in Mormonism). Had Paxton's character died, the wives would, under Mormon law, all be widows, and no longer anybody's wives. It's like serial marriages without the divorces between each one.
But in a poly marriage everybody is married to everybody else, and remain married even when one
But contrary to popular belief, people like my uncle come in other sexes and races. And when people of other sexes and races make claims of discrimination, that can cause big problems for their employers
You forgot to conclude your idea, which is, apparently, that, since people who should be fired come in all races and sexes, then I should be able to refuse to hire any person of a specific race or sex (or religion), because, for sure, at least someone in that list will be a jerk. By refusing to hire, say, any white Christian male, I have surely avoided hiring at least one character like your uncle.
I am not completely sure that caste is unobservable by members of a caste culture.
My limited understanding is that upper castes and lower castes tend to have slightly different physical traits (darker skin or other Dravidic features being one, but not the only one) and cultural markers that are fairly visible within their societies. They (or most of them) cannot "pass" as upper caste.
Obviously, to us westerners, those differences are unobservable. But that's on us, and our lack of familiarity. As Maxwell's Smart's foe The C(l/r)aw pointed out, all American blondes also look the same to them.
Define immigrant as someone whose forefathers are not from America, and you end, at best, with Native Americans. All others (all of us others) are immigrants.
Define American as anyone born in the USA, and you will end with a lot of Hispanics, Asian Americans, Muslims, and even a new wave of AfroCaribbeans that have little in common with the American blacks. These are people that many on the right side of the aisle would not accept as true Americans (see the 14th Amendment citizenship at birth debate).
So how do you think immigrants should be defined? And why would do have the cutoff there?
Funny thing, if America had the same citizenship rules as Germany, Trump likely could have been German Chancellor, but not US President.
1. Chinese five spices goes wonderful with it. About a heaped teaspoon. Can’t recommend it enough. On the other side, I didn’t put any salt, and for my taste it didn’t need it.
2. Are you sure about the amount of sugar? I realized too late I didn’t have enough sugar at home, and I put like half a cup or less. I was planning to add some agave to top it up if I found it needed more sweetness. Thank goodness I didn’t, because I found the jam a bit on the sweet side. But, I’m not a sweet tooth, so that might be me only.
3. The lemon juice is critical. I actually put too much by accident, and though I took out most of it (I only had the tomatoes in at that time), I know I still went over. And I’m glad I did, it has such a nice acidity that I ended adding more lemon juice halfway through. Try it again with less sugar and more lemon, and let me know.
4. I sautéed the cut tomatoes in an iron cast skillet for l8ke five minutes before starting the process. I think it gave it a hint or caramelization that I found very pleasant.
5. How did you get a full jar out of this recipe? After four hours (and truly, there was no way I could cook it any longer, there was no more liquid left), I ended with only half a jar (of very nice tomato jam)
Because I put Chinese five spices to almost everything (grilled steaks excepted) , I was thinking if I should add some when I do the six hours version. But since I do not know what the jam tastes, I am not sure it will make sense?
My second question is what do you think of using plum tomatoes instead of roma or vine for the jam. They are normally softer, and they are the ones my Spaniard) mother used to make tomato sauces, including pasta sauces. I am thinking that they can cook faster and reduce the time (to just 4 1/2 hours :-) )
Last, why not quickly sauté the tomatoes (particularly plum tomatoes). I think the char in the skin will be nice?
Thanks again for your posts. I might not always comment, but I do read and analyze them
Me? I didn’t post the thing, I didn’t say it was relevant, I didn’t say:
For what it’s worth, I think that both of these things are good and both of these things are tools that will help you (or anybody) succeed.
I just wondered if whoever wrote that thought that THOSE TWO were the only two things that were good, and the rest was a boatload of stupid cliches, or if that person thought that the rest of the post had other things that should be treated as, what did someone called them: moral realities, perhaps?
Whoever posted that thing can tell you what he meant when he posted it. You should ask him. He’ll be happy to explain it to you.
Me, I’m just asking questions to that guy. What other pieces of wisdom and common sense are in the poster? I’ll let you know if the guy answers. He’s cool so for sure he’ll make sure there’s no doubt about what he meant. He probably hit POST too soon. It happens to the best of us.
For what it’s worth, I think that both of these things are good and both of these things are tools that will help you (or anybody) succeed.
Even the BIPOC.
Can I play?
Husband is breadwinner and head of household
Wife is homemaker and subordinate to the husband
Are these also tools that will help anybody succeed? Will white culture be doomed if we allow children to share bedrooms? Is it a sign of how low whites in America have fallen that the only Protestant Justice in the Supreme Court is a black woman?
1. There is a (statistical) material reality that black crime is higher than white crime
It is a material, and statistical, reality, that no one can deny, without denying reality. It is also so statistical that the word "statistics" is included in the question.
Now, assuming that it is also true that:
3. There’s a material reality that statistics that are true in the aggregate cannot predict the behavior of a single individual
What do we do with and about those statistics? I think that is the moral question that needs to be addressed.
Hanania's response is (or has been described as being) to ignore the third material fact and to "police the hell out of every black man, woman and child, from senators and surgeons to loose cigarette sellers, because, "statistically", you kill catch more criminals that way.
Of course, policing every black person to hell, statistically impacts negatively their educational and economic circumstances, at least compared to those that are not being policed in the same way. I'd rather, you know, not have to wait for a life saving surgery because the surgeon has been stopped by the police asking why is he driving a Range Rover in that nice neighborhood.
So, would you accept that material fact 2 is also true, and should also be addressed?
1. There is a (statistical) material reality that black crime is higher than white crime.
2. There is a (statistical) material reality that black families have been suffering economic and educational disadvantages that have compounded through generations compared to white families.
3. There’s a material reality that statistics that are true in the aggregate cannot predict the behavior of a single individual.
What moral realities do each of these material realities support or disprove? Hanania wants to talk about reality number 1, and would gladly ignore realities 2 and 3. Others’ mileage might vary.
On the majority-minority issue, that's true, nut the USA is slightly less than 60% non-hispanic white, so we are not very far from being a majority-minority country. Therefore, NV is closer to the average than most states.
Travel from the East Coast should not be a factor, unless somehow the East Coast is more important, and candidates must come from there. NV is very close to two of the largest states by population (CA and TX). And we are talking about a change that it's supposed to last decades, so Trumps opinion about the West should be immaterial.
Lastly, talking about water and climate change seems to me a very important thing for candidates to talk about. Significantly more important for the vast majority of Americans than maple or pigs raising.
Again, I am suggesting a state small enough to be reachable to small, budget limited, campaigns, which was Bryan's most valid point in the OP, but that looks closer to what most Americans look like, not just racially, but economically, in lifestyle, in the work they do, and in the things that affect them the most.
No state would be absolutely Goldilocks right, but a very good case can be made for Nevada
I understand the idea that the first primaries/caucuses should be in small states where small campaigns can operate with small budgets, so they can get to be known. In theory, it makes a lot of sense.
In practice, small states are mostly rural, and are therefore very different from the places real Americans (as opposed to REAL AMERICANS (TM)) live. As a country, we are majoritarily urban, and our cities are very diverse culturally, socially, economically, (and racially ,but I do agree we need to try to start moving away from race). Cities and metropolitan areas is were most of the US economical activity is taking place. The vast majority of Americans are not farmers, they are employees, in companies big and small. Our retail politics should be focused on them.
Manchester is NH's largest city, and it's barely above 100,000 people. That's smaller than some neighborhoods in Houston, where I live Yes, NH might have mountains and sea, but Portsmouth is not a port like Long Beach, or Houston, or Miami, or New York/New Jersey. There is barely any port activity except some yachts in summer, and probably some commercial fishing (though it's not mentioned anywhere I was able to find). There is not much economic activity in NH at all.
If you want a small state that looks like America, I think Nevada is your best bet. Nevada has twice the GDP of New Hampshire (165 bn vs 83 bn) with similar (albeit a bit lower) GDP per capita. It has a big city, it's socially and racially diverse, and it's small enough that you can reach most of it's population for retail campaigning. If retail campaigning in a place looks like America is what you are looking for, Nevada is waiting for you
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “Open Mic for the week of 11/6/2023”
Any “feel’ of what price ($/MWh) were they offering the energy to the utilities?
Anything about 100 $/MWh (10 c/kWh) would be completely uneconomical. That would still be about twice what renewable energy can be bought on a long term basis
On “About Last Night: Election 2023 Edition”
So, I agree that R’s are eating it post-Roe, but the irony is that 15-weeks (i.e. abortion on-demand, largely as it is *practiced* today) is losing in the messaging wars as ‘extreme’. VA is 26-weeks plus exceptions (requires Doctors to sign-off after 26 weeks). That’s the delta 26 to 15. The number of Abortions that would be restricted by 26 to 15? Approximately 0
You are answering your our comment one paragraph above, when you say "15-weeks plus Exceptions is not seen as a reliable bet." It is not seen as a reliable bet because since the very first day Republicans have made it clear that those exceptions would be interprepeted in the most restrictive way possible.
Had Governors, legislators, district attorneys, etc., in those 15 or 6 weeks jurisdictions made claer from the beginning that every-single-borderline case should be interpreted as yes, an abortion is allowed in this case, or any case where doctors believe it's necessary, then, you are right, we would have been in Europe's territory.
But from the message has been so far: "Are you dying?" If not, then you do not need an abortion, and to have one will make your doctors -and you- criminally liable.
Only when the Texas, Florida, Georgia, etc. Attorney Generals publish guidance that indeed, the exceptions will be construed at least as liberally as in Europe, will people agree with shorter "abortion at will" windows. But so far, there are too many examples of "There will be exceptions, but this one is not an exception" cases.
As it's said in these comboxes frequently, look at what they do, not what they say.
On “That Time I Drove a Tesla for a Week”
Small nitpick, it’s not “by design”, a design that could be changed. It’s the physics of batteries that reduces the rate of charge as the battery is more charged.
To overcome that effect would require a staged charging system (essentially a series of chargers from small to big that take over as the battery charge exceeds certain level), which would be quite expensive. We use such a system to quickly fill out compressed gas vessels, which are subject to the same diminishing returns effect.
Having said that,the comment is accurate. That last 20% will take a long time
On “Video Throughput: Apollo 13”
You mention the Apollo program and th3 COVID vaccines as examples of what we can do if we put our will, and resources, to it.
I want to add the Panamá Canal to it. Even after one hundred years some of the engineering feats, like the sluice gates, are unrivaled. To have built that in only ten years, and in the meantime to rid a country of endemic yellow fever by breaking out the transmission vector, is nothing short of mind blowing.
I strongly recommend David McCullough’s book The Path Between the Seas as the best and most complete narrative of that process
On “From CNN: Israel says it is ‘at war’ after Hamas surprise attack”
Good for you, you corrected my chronology, but reminding me that:
Poland expelled Germans into Germany
India expelled Pakistanis into Pakistan
Pakistan expelled Indians into India
Azerbaijan will probably expel Armenians into Armenia
And of course, Greece expelled Turks into Turkey, and Turkey expelled Greeks into Greece, and we are probably forgetting some others
However, after all this nitpicking you ignored the substantive question:
Where will Israel expel the Palestinians to/ Palestina?
"
The Palestinians to leave and go where? That’s where they were born. There’s nowhere they can go to. Expulsions worked in the XV or the XIX century, but not in these days of passports and nations.
Live as minorities how? Like blacks in the USA in 2023? It might not be great, but there’s formal equality, there’s voting, there’s a lot. Or as blacks in South Africa in the 1970s? Formal apartheid, for generations.
It is clear that Israel will always militarily win whatever war the Palestinians throws at them. Israel has to decide what the peace is going to be. And for whatever reason, they have never put forth what is Israel’s end plan.
On “Trump Lawyers Fail to Demand a Jury Trial: Malpractice, Strategery, or Both?”
There are two types of companies, which are financed completely differently. Most companies in real life are a mixture of the two types, but some pure examples do exist.
The first type are eternal companies, whose life is unlimited (not unlimited in a corporate sense -unlimited in the sense that they are [almost] free of obsolesce risk and therefore will be operating forever. Utilities are this kind of company. They show vegetative growth (as in customers mate and give birth to new customers that, once they reach maturity, sign their own contract with the utility). Utilities never pay their loans because they never lose customers or revenue. Quite the opposite, they grow permanently at a moderate but predictable rate, and keep getting new loans to serve the new customers. Banks love these companies because they are very low risk.
(As an aside, countries and governments are like this: taxpayers mate and have little future taxpayers. They never run out of a revenue source, so there's no need to pay the loans, just to roll them over, and take new loans to serve the new taxpayers)
The second type are companies with a limited life. They are based on a technology that changes a lot, or based out of assets that deplete or depreciate substantially (a mine, for instance, or a big smelter or refinery). These companies take big loans at the beginning of their life to cover the substantial capital expenditures needed to start operations, and have to amortize those loans in full before the underlaying assets are consumed.
(As a second aside, households are like this. They have a limited time (the work life of the parents) to pay for all their big purchases, like housing and education, and cannot extend the repayment past a certain moment. That is why comparisons between the government's budget and a family budget make no sense. We can discuss if taxes are too low or too high, but we can be sure that we are not running out of taxpayers.
In your particular case, TV cable is closer to a utility, so rollover of debts is likely the correct financing strategy
On “Blowing Out the Speaker”
It's not tit for tat. The Dems are not Kingmakers. Gaetz is.
If the Democratic caucus saves McCarthy today what happens tomorrow? This is not Westminster, where a Sitting Prime Minister that survives a motion to remove him as leader is assured that no other motion can be filed for the next twelve months.
Even if he wanted to, McCarthy cannot offer anything -valuable or symbolic- to the Democrats. The moment he does, Gaetz will again move to vacate the chair, the Dems would need to save him again, and so on and on until he was gone.
If McCarthy had survived yesterday's vote with Democratic support, explicit or implicit, like the Democrats nor showing up or voting present, McCarthy's only option to remain as Speaker for more than another week would be to run as far away from the Democrats as he could, and show the Freedom Caucus that he had learned his lesson and that he was ready to play by their rules.
It is not that by not supporting McCarthy the Democrats sacrificed the long term interests of the country for the pleasure of kicking him when he was down. The only two possible outcomes were a motion to vacate Groundhog Day or for McCarthy to become completely and fully beholden to Gaetz and his pals.
The Republicans need to break the MAGA stronghold on the Party. Every action the Democrats may take to try to help moderate Republicans defeat the MAGA faction will only make it stronger.
On “Can She Do That? New Mexico Governor Suspends Gun Carry Laws”
That is a 100% true, and needs to be addressed. But the problem with guns and suicides is one of opportunity, and of perceived painlessness.
It is more or less agreed that the desire to commit suicide eases out significantly if the victim is unable to kill himself at that moment. Guns are deemed a fairly quick and painless way to kill yourself. Barbiturates are probably better, but more difficult to obtain. Jumping off a window is intuitively very scary and much less frequent.
But though I don't own any guns now, I can still buy one and kill myself before dinnertime this evening. If It was harder to get a gun -let's say 48 hours- there's a significant likelihood I would not kill myself. Guns not just replace other methods, they likely increase the total number of suicides, and that, too, is a problem.
"
Andrew Sullivan wrote a very good description of what the case for marriage is, and why marriage is a conservative institution. After 35 years I think it still holds
https://newrepublic.com/article/79054/here-comes-the-groom
"
It must be a day that's not ending in "Y". I think this comment by Jaybird, to which I fully, 100% subscribe, describes exactly why poly marriages are not going likely to be a thing. And let me add another question:
D is A and B's biological child, and is born during the poly marriage. Is C D's parent? Does C get shared custody in case of a divorce?
People simplify poly marriage in their heads as "plural" marriage: one guy (gal) simultaneously married with several gals (guys). In Big Love, all the wives were married to Bill Paxton, but to each other (for a starters, there's no SSM in Mormonism). Had Paxton's character died, the wives would, under Mormon law, all be widows, and no longer anybody's wives. It's like serial marriages without the divorces between each one.
But in a poly marriage everybody is married to everybody else, and remain married even when one
On “From Politico: An effort to ban caste discrimination in California has touched a nerve”
But contrary to popular belief, people like my uncle come in other sexes and races. And when people of other sexes and races make claims of discrimination, that can cause big problems for their employers
You forgot to conclude your idea, which is, apparently, that, since people who should be fired come in all races and sexes, then I should be able to refuse to hire any person of a specific race or sex (or religion), because, for sure, at least someone in that list will be a jerk. By refusing to hire, say, any white Christian male, I have surely avoided hiring at least one character like your uncle.
Makes all the sense
"
I am not completely sure that caste is unobservable by members of a caste culture.
My limited understanding is that upper castes and lower castes tend to have slightly different physical traits (darker skin or other Dravidic features being one, but not the only one) and cultural markers that are fairly visible within their societies. They (or most of them) cannot "pass" as upper caste.
Obviously, to us westerners, those differences are unobservable. But that's on us, and our lack of familiarity. As Maxwell's Smart's foe The C(l/r)aw pointed out, all American blondes also look the same to them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftgAG3Vnif8
On “The Biscuit of Diversity”
I thought about point that out too, that the only true Americans apparently are the horses. The rest coming from somewhere else
(and of course the horses left America to become successful immigrants in Eurasia, and came back here only several thousands years later).
But inquisitive minds want to know? How do you think "immigrants" should be defined?
"
It’s like the abortion issue, up to when the dog caught the car.
And if the did catches this car at some point, the effect on the right side of the aisle will likely be similar
"
Define immigrant as someone whose forefathers are not from America, and you end, at best, with Native Americans. All others (all of us others) are immigrants.
Define American as anyone born in the USA, and you will end with a lot of Hispanics, Asian Americans, Muslims, and even a new wave of AfroCaribbeans that have little in common with the American blacks. These are people that many on the right side of the aisle would not accept as true Americans (see the 14th Amendment citizenship at birth debate).
So how do you think immigrants should be defined? And why would do have the cutoff there?
Funny thing, if America had the same citizenship rules as Germany, Trump likely could have been German Chancellor, but not US President.
On “Tomato Jam (Extended Jam)”
Okie dokie, I made the jam today.
Couple of comments, or more, hehe
1. Chinese five spices goes wonderful with it. About a heaped teaspoon. Can’t recommend it enough. On the other side, I didn’t put any salt, and for my taste it didn’t need it.
2. Are you sure about the amount of sugar? I realized too late I didn’t have enough sugar at home, and I put like half a cup or less. I was planning to add some agave to top it up if I found it needed more sweetness. Thank goodness I didn’t, because I found the jam a bit on the sweet side. But, I’m not a sweet tooth, so that might be me only.
3. The lemon juice is critical. I actually put too much by accident, and though I took out most of it (I only had the tomatoes in at that time), I know I still went over. And I’m glad I did, it has such a nice acidity that I ended adding more lemon juice halfway through. Try it again with less sugar and more lemon, and let me know.
4. I sautéed the cut tomatoes in an iron cast skillet for l8ke five minutes before starting the process. I think it gave it a hint or caramelization that I found very pleasant.
5. How did you get a full jar out of this recipe? After four hours (and truly, there was no way I could cook it any longer, there was no more liquid left), I ended with only half a jar (of very nice tomato jam)
Many thanks again. It was fun.
"
Because I put Chinese five spices to almost everything (grilled steaks excepted) , I was thinking if I should add some when I do the six hours version. But since I do not know what the jam tastes, I am not sure it will make sense?
My second question is what do you think of using plum tomatoes instead of roma or vine for the jam. They are normally softer, and they are the ones my Spaniard) mother used to make tomato sauces, including pasta sauces. I am thinking that they can cook faster and reduce the time (to just 4 1/2 hours :-) )
Last, why not quickly sauté the tomatoes (particularly plum tomatoes). I think the char in the skin will be nice?
Thanks again for your posts. I might not always comment, but I do read and analyze them
On “Open Mic for the week of 8/7/2023”
Then you’ve answered your own question. It wasn’t that difficult
"
Me? I didn’t post the thing, I didn’t say it was relevant, I didn’t say:
For what it’s worth, I think that both of these things are good and both of these things are tools that will help you (or anybody) succeed.
I just wondered if whoever wrote that thought that THOSE TWO were the only two things that were good, and the rest was a boatload of stupid cliches, or if that person thought that the rest of the post had other things that should be treated as, what did someone called them: moral realities, perhaps?
Whoever posted that thing can tell you what he meant when he posted it. You should ask him. He’ll be happy to explain it to you.
Me, I’m just asking questions to that guy. What other pieces of wisdom and common sense are in the poster? I’ll let you know if the guy answers. He’s cool so for sure he’ll make sure there’s no doubt about what he meant. He probably hit POST too soon. It happens to the best of us.
"
For what it’s worth, I think that both of these things are good and both of these things are tools that will help you (or anybody) succeed.
Even the BIPOC.
Can I play?
Husband is breadwinner and head of household
Wife is homemaker and subordinate to the husband
Are these also tools that will help anybody succeed? Will white culture be doomed if we allow children to share bedrooms? Is it a sign of how low whites in America have fallen that the only Protestant Justice in the Supreme Court is a black woman?
"
Yes, I accept that ...
1. There is a (statistical) material reality that black crime is higher than white crime
It is a material, and statistical, reality, that no one can deny, without denying reality. It is also so statistical that the word "statistics" is included in the question.
Now, assuming that it is also true that:
3. There’s a material reality that statistics that are true in the aggregate cannot predict the behavior of a single individual
What do we do with and about those statistics? I think that is the moral question that needs to be addressed.
Hanania's response is (or has been described as being) to ignore the third material fact and to "police the hell out of every black man, woman and child, from senators and surgeons to loose cigarette sellers, because, "statistically", you kill catch more criminals that way.
Of course, policing every black person to hell, statistically impacts negatively their educational and economic circumstances, at least compared to those that are not being policed in the same way. I'd rather, you know, not have to wait for a life saving surgery because the surgeon has been stopped by the police asking why is he driving a Range Rover in that nice neighborhood.
So, would you accept that material fact 2 is also true, and should also be addressed?
"
That one hits hard in the BSDI realm.
1. There is a (statistical) material reality that black crime is higher than white crime.
2. There is a (statistical) material reality that black families have been suffering economic and educational disadvantages that have compounded through generations compared to white families.
3. There’s a material reality that statistics that are true in the aggregate cannot predict the behavior of a single individual.
What moral realities do each of these material realities support or disprove? Hanania wants to talk about reality number 1, and would gladly ignore realities 2 and 3. Others’ mileage might vary.
On “New Hampshire’s First in the Nation Primary Is Good for Everyone”
thank you for your comments.
On the majority-minority issue, that's true, nut the USA is slightly less than 60% non-hispanic white, so we are not very far from being a majority-minority country. Therefore, NV is closer to the average than most states.
Travel from the East Coast should not be a factor, unless somehow the East Coast is more important, and candidates must come from there. NV is very close to two of the largest states by population (CA and TX). And we are talking about a change that it's supposed to last decades, so Trumps opinion about the West should be immaterial.
Lastly, talking about water and climate change seems to me a very important thing for candidates to talk about. Significantly more important for the vast majority of Americans than maple or pigs raising.
Again, I am suggesting a state small enough to be reachable to small, budget limited, campaigns, which was Bryan's most valid point in the OP, but that looks closer to what most Americans look like, not just racially, but economically, in lifestyle, in the work they do, and in the things that affect them the most.
No state would be absolutely Goldilocks right, but a very good case can be made for Nevada
"
I understand the idea that the first primaries/caucuses should be in small states where small campaigns can operate with small budgets, so they can get to be known. In theory, it makes a lot of sense.
In practice, small states are mostly rural, and are therefore very different from the places real Americans (as opposed to REAL AMERICANS (TM)) live. As a country, we are majoritarily urban, and our cities are very diverse culturally, socially, economically, (and racially ,but I do agree we need to try to start moving away from race). Cities and metropolitan areas is were most of the US economical activity is taking place. The vast majority of Americans are not farmers, they are employees, in companies big and small. Our retail politics should be focused on them.
Manchester is NH's largest city, and it's barely above 100,000 people. That's smaller than some neighborhoods in Houston, where I live Yes, NH might have mountains and sea, but Portsmouth is not a port like Long Beach, or Houston, or Miami, or New York/New Jersey. There is barely any port activity except some yachts in summer, and probably some commercial fishing (though it's not mentioned anywhere I was able to find). There is not much economic activity in NH at all.
If you want a small state that looks like America, I think Nevada is your best bet. Nevada has twice the GDP of New Hampshire (165 bn vs 83 bn) with similar (albeit a bit lower) GDP per capita. It has a big city, it's socially and racially diverse, and it's small enough that you can reach most of it's population for retail campaigning. If retail campaigning in a place looks like America is what you are looking for, Nevada is waiting for you
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.