What is all that racket outside every night, once the sun goes down? Why its tree frogs! They are singing their hearts out, looking for a mate.
Tree frogs are definitely a sign of warm weather. They are also a sign that all is well and right with the world. In the forest, when tree frogs get quiet, it means that they are aware of danger. Their silence becomes an anti-alarm of sorts.
Near my house, nothing shuts them up. Their sound can be deafening. Oddly enough, they sound isn’t coming from Bull Run Creek but rather the opposite direction. So much for the bull frog theory. If there are bull frogs in the mix they must be ones who have taken over someone’s swimming pool. Croakers’ rights or something like that.
Speaker Livingston was man enough to own up to his sin and step down from his job.
Bill Clinton lied to all of us and tried everything he could to evade paying for his sins.
Big difference.
Wikipedia, my eye. I tried Catholic websites up the wazoo and never found a single reference to a “Narthex Catholic.” Must be a veeerrry limited expression.
No, I know what a cafeteria catholic is – pick and choose. Pretty big difference between that and tossing the whole concept at the door. There are people who can’t live the life they piously profess while in church. It’s a simple concept mentioned frequently in scripture and by theologians. Instead of the persistant grinding criticism, maybe you could just think about how apt a description it is!
With regard to disparaging his faith….seriously???? YOU don’t think others should attack people making disparaging remarks about beliefs without knowing them personally??? I simply don’t like how he uses his religion publicly to beat others up.
The Duggar kid committed a crime – Jenner didn’t. Rationalize away.
And I meant to mention – those that support the death penalty and don’t accept the infallibility of the Pope in all things are cafeteria Catholics just like Kennedy and the others you selected for your attempt to define. New encyclical coming out….
“Human” is the word!
@punchak, if “Other” is offered as a choice I write in “Human”. The problem is that schools don’t allow other; they can’t let the students decide–they have to pick one of the 5 categories or be assigned one. A few years ago they started allowing multiple selections but when you select all they have a hierarchy algorithm that reduces your selection to a single category. It is a mess.
A nuclear family has to share a single racial category or they aren’t a family…race is essentially an extension of clans. When people of two different races creates a new family (has children, marries) either one of them adopts the race of the other or the family creates a new blended race category. If mix-race families maintain separate racial identities the children are left with an identity crises. That is what Rachel Dolezal’s parents did wrong in their family.
Schools in Virginia do not check the race box on an enrollment form. The parents choose.
Not all children are the same race in some families. Schools have nothing to say about it.
@Moon, I left race blank on my child’s entrance form and the school selected a race for us. I went up the line to district, state and even the federal government asking for the right to not to have my child classified by race. Everyone was nice enough about it but explained that between Virginia as a slave state and the history of resisting integration that schools were not allowed to leave that data column blank so that schools could be monitored for discrimination. If parents do not fill it in the school assigns that child a race. They did agree that multi-racial designation was a problem (they only allowed 5 race selections at the time) and promised that eventually they would allow multiple selections. About 10 years later our school district started allowing multiple race selections.
Eh, 10,000 years maybe???
I think your missing the point on why this woman needs help… she has essentially put on a black woman’s costume (some call it ‘black face’) and pretended to be something she is not.
She has even claimed her father was black (which he wasn’t), that she is Native American (which she is not kinda like Elizabeth Warren), she said she was born in a teepee (which she wasn’t) and said that her Native American parents hunted with bows and arrows to provide food (which never happened). This woman has racial identity dis-morphia I’ve ever seen.
She is the exact copy of a female Ali-G (look up Ali-G and you will know what I’m talking about).
@Ed Myers
I put my son’s race as Asian (my wife is 1/2 Korean). I did it so that he wouldn’t be considered a ‘white male’ when going for grants/scholarships/loans/etc… in the future. There is nothing worse these days than applying for anything as white male thanks to race and gender quotas our government has imposes on school admissions/grants/loans.
@Lyssa
It seems to me that your definition of a “Narthex Catholic” is one who leaves his Catholic piety in the sanctuary and, in effect, displays none or not enough of true piety in his life outside the walls of the Church. Agree that such a definition can be very valid.
But, as I understand it, your criticism of this Doocey fellow seems to be that he tends to use his Catholicism before the Fox cameras on a cable talk show to scold others for their secular misdeeds or misbehaviors or actions or whatever. I would say, then, that Doocey is the opposite of a “Narthex Catholic,” is he not? He takes his Catholic beliefs outside the sanctuary and uses them in his self-expression. He opts not to hide his candle under a bushel, as the Biblical admonition goes.
You may not like Doocey’s style, but I don’t see the “Narthex Catholic” in this case. Now, talk about the old time Mafiosi in that vein, and you will get my agreement.
Give me a break. Who told him he was the judge and allowed to act holier than thou. He ought to think about what he professes to believe every week. Not a lot of professing about pointing out failures of othersgoes on at my church; usually the very opposite. That’s my point. I’m glad you’ve broadened your scope and realize the term has some present day meaning. How very liberal of you ✌
I don’t support things blindly based on definition of liberal or conservative…I watch MSNBC and Fox &Friends every morning. Neither is perfect or really even good, but Fox has less news and more judgement calls than Joe and Mika. And whether I agree with content or not, my brain refuses to let me support nasty and or cruel people.
It looks like Pete Candland has come running out of closed session to sing like a bird to his BFF “the Sheriff.”
Way to go Pete, you tool. I guess county rules and customs count for nothing.
@Friar Tuck
Friar Tuck Who Has His/Her Head Tucked Somewhere Where It Shouldn’t Be!
Your obvious hatred of Candland is wearing very thin. I read the Sheriff’s blog post and I watched the video of the meeting. I also called a good friend who works in the County offices and did some fact checking.
The fact: The statement attributed to Candland was made in open session, no one needed to “come running out of closed session.”
The fact: All of the conversations reported by the Sheriff were made in public and outside of closed session. The only question was the sequencing of who left the closed session and when.
The fact: Candland stated on the public record (and on the video) that he had left the meeting.
The fact: Nohe stated that he had left the meeting.
The fact: Lawson stated she had left the meeting.
Caddigan did say from the dais that all of them left the meeting at one time or another.
So the facts completely obliterate your little attack.
What is left is your hatred of Candland and willingness to say or do anything you need to in order to put a ding on Candland’s backside.
I am personally not a fan of the antics of most of the BOCS members, and I have personal issues with Candland too. But making stuff up is just too much for me.
How about applying “rules” of common sense and integrity to what you are saying on this blog?
So you would have me censure Friar? Not going to do it. Not interested enough to find out the story on this one.
In defense of Friar Tuck, I don’t necessarily see hatred. If you are from SoN blog, you have a real nerve talking about attacks. There is an attack there with each post, from what I have seen. Additionally, Candland has been known in the past to talk about things discussed in closed session.
I have email verifying this statement.
So, until you came on shouting it up at Friar, I don’t really think anyone was paying attention.
Reminds me of what Little John did to Friar Tuck when the two jousted with fighting sticks on that log bridge in Sherwood Forest. Plop!!!
I a have neutered albino chocolate lab named Cindy for sale. Any takers?
How old?
@Charlotte
Who the hell really cares who left when. All he and his Humpty Dumpty shill have done is draw negative attention to themselves. Nasty, nasty people. PWC is a minority-majority county now. Watch out, change is a’comin.
@Ed Myers
Someone was giving you a line of bullshit.
It’s the feds who now require the data. You should have filled out a race. When you don’t, that leaves the door wide open for some busy body to do it for you.
@Charlotte
You know, Charlotte, I thought about your comments over night and I am speechless actually.
It is obvious where you have come from. It is obvious that you are “in the know” or feel you are. That narrows your identity down quite a bit.
Don’t even come here talking about hate. Correct me if I am wrong, but you come from a blog where it was open season on James Young for days. Regardless of one’s personal opinion on James Young, it was a cowardly post.
An anonymous blog writes a scathing piece on a local activist and then a multitude of anonymous readers make scores of basically unchristian remarks about this guy. It was an anonymous attack that was a character assassination of a private citizen.
For the record, I know who talks and how it is done. It was all spelled out in an email. Think on that one for a while.
I will not censure Friar Tuck over his remarks. He is entitled to express himself as long as he follows my rules.
While I am addressing these issues, I don’t like the mimicry of public officials and the demonization of Donna (once at tax payer expense) has also been unacceptable. Don’t speak to me of truth, justice and the American way.
Okay, I will correct you where you are wrong.
I am “not from another blog.” I am not affiliated with any blog, including yours.
I don’t know anything about the James Young issue.
I did not ask in any way for you, as the blog owner, to censure Friar Tuck. I merely made some observations about his/her post that, as is typical, attacks Candland for inane reasons.
I applied some of the analytical skills from a class that I paid a good chunk of money to learn about a couple of years ago. The claims made by Friar Tuck were simply incorrect in the sense he/she was claiming some breach of ethics or the law in Candland releasing information from a closed session of the BOCS. That does not appear to be the case based on simple analysis and a little research.
I am only “in the know” on things that I elect to check into. I use my brain, a little research, and I have a girlfriend who works for the County who often tells me about what goes on down there.
Beyond that, I am Charlotte. On a blog where no one seems to use a recognizable name, it seems odd for you to call me out.
My observation on this is that unless I agree with you, then I am somehow “from that other blog.”
I did not speak to you of “truth, justice and the American way,” unless of course you are Friar Tuck. In that case, I only observed how far off base the allegations were based on my research.
Oh bull crap. I have a bridge for sale…..
Of course you are from another blog. Check out your past posts over here. They tell another story.
Any time anyone jumps on Pete over anything, you come flying over to defend him.
By the way, I know most of the posters here in person, so and they know each other.
Hopefully, we can get Wolve out to our next get together. We are planning one in September. Shall we include you on our guest list so you get to know every one?
@Moon-howler
Mmmmm…… fooood……… traaaaffic…….. I’ll try to be there
I guess Maureen Caddigan now realizes you can’t cut a deal with the Devil. Unless the Gainesville alter and his “handler” could control her, she was nothing to them. Peter Perfect even met with her over dinner while his handler sat a few tables away.
It’s nice to see the lady extricated herself from that web of lies and manipulation.
@Friar Tuck yes but the poor woman has behaved badly toward the others on the dias. She made a miscalculation when going with that side. Will they take her back?
HD, perhaps the moral is to not cut deals with the Devil?????
Who shows up next on this blog? Jack and Jill? Little Tommy Tucker? The cat who went to London to see the queen?
Red Riding Hood and her Wolf?
There goes Pete, beating a dead horse. God, he just can’t leave things alone. He must love contention more than anyone I have ever known.
Isn’t there a time limit on how long he can hog the meetings?
Maybe he doesn’t deserve a raise. However, a lot of those folks have been serving the county for a long time without a raise.
You get what you pay for.
Did anyone have storm damage? I lost another tree and have a broken market umbrella that was only a year old.
GRRRRRRRRR. The wind picked the umbrella up out of its stand and blew it over a fence and onto the front porch.
I don’t know what other damages. There were fairly sizable limbs down in the middle of Sudley Manor Drive.
It looks like Candland’s unpaid chief advisor is appearing on the Sheriff’s post today- bereft of his clothes.
That ain’t Corey. those pictures are definitely mislabeled.
Jail bait.
Obamacare was upheld. ACA subsidies were upheld in a 6-3 vote. The decision was written by Justice Roberts. Thomas, Scalia, and Alito were the 3 votes to overturn. Obamacare will stand.
That is very good news. Obamacare is here to stay
To Rick Smith–if you get in bed with the devil, you will lose votes.
Another coward–a “guest opinion” without a name or even a moniker.
Yep….. Roberts rewrote the law. Again. For the third time.
The ends justifies the means.
I believe the good far outweighs the bad.
There never was the slightest suspicion that Congress intended to withhold subsidies from otherwise eligible people who got their policies from the federal exchange. The conservatives on the Court prevailed here. It was the activist liberal dissenters (Scalia, Alito, Thomas) who wanted to overturn the clear intent of Congress and insert the Court into a super-legislative role.
Fortunately, and ironically, Scalia in his better days had done a lot of good work on statutory construction and on the necessity of looking at legislation as a whole, not isolated phrases, to determine intent. His earlier work carried the day with the majority, although, increasingly, Scalia seems now to be more of an angry political partisan than the legal scholar he is well capable of being. One wonders if he perhaps is reading too many blogs at night.
@Scout
You mean “the clear intent of a Congress” in which the majority party wrote a deliberately misleading bill (per Professor Gruber); denied the people the right to know what was in the bill before they passed it (per Pelosi and Reid); lied to rest of us about what it actually contained (Obama); and snookered much of the country while not even realizing until later that they had screwed up in the exchange/subsidies department? If you say so, Scout. But I question the use of the word “clear” with intent….or with anything associated with the Democratic Party.
None of those propaganda tropes was before the Court, Wolve. That’s just blogtalk in the echo chamber. I meant only what considered in yesterday’s decision: whether Congress intended that subsidies would not be available if insurance was obtained through a federal, as opposed to a state, exchange. On that, there was no contemporary evidence that Congress intended the law to have that kind of internal self-defeat mechanism. The Court’s majority so found.
These cases come before the Court in a relatively narrow legal context. They aren’t there to validate mass hysteria about content. This was a relatively narrow issue that was handled conservatively by the majority pursuant to long established principles of statutory construction.
The SOCTUS ruling was the correct interpretation of the law in context of the entire law. The ruling is also the best thing for the GOP as it can still raise money and campaign on the repeal – even though there were 8 pieces of GOP legislation to fix the law and continue subsidies to states that did not set up their own exchange.
If only the GOP would help fix the law instead of repealing it – I still have not seen the replace part.
A bill in secret – how about TPP – has the Republican led House and Senate released the TPP before they voted on it? No.
Help me out here. What is the TTP? I am drawing a blank this morning.
The Pacific Trade Negotiating authority.
I think maybe I am just to dumb or lazy to figure that all out.
Same sex marriage affirmed by SCOTUS in a 5-4 decision. Kennedy was the swing vote.
14 amendment
Today is the anniversary date of Lawrence v. Texas.
Amazing Grace, how sweet the sound! Obama knocked it out of the park today with his eulogy.
@Scout
Expand your mind a little bit there, lawyer man. That post was big sarcastic laugh at your use of the phrase “clear intent” with regard to any aspect of the making and selling of that piece of Obama crap. Or anything else he does, for that matter.
@Pat.Herve
Aw, that is so sweet, Pat. You keep trying to smack the Repubs for not carrying out their promise to repair or replace that disaster of an ACA, knowing full well that the idiot in the White House will veto anything that comes out of this Congress on the issue. Give it a rest, please.
And as if Obama and his henchmen had nothing to do with ensuring that we would not see the TTP before it was passed. Transparency in government gone to Hell all around Washington, and We the People are the dumb suckers in the program.
@Scout
“There never was the slightest suspicion that Congress intended to withhold subsidies from otherwise eligible people who got their policies from the federal exchange.”
Complete and utter claptrap. The bill was quite clear that states that did not play along would not get subsidies.
Wolve is EXACTLY right.
@Pat.Herve
“If only the GOP would help fix the law instead of repealing it – I still have not seen the replace part.”
SCOTUS rewrote the bill.
There is no fixing the ACA. It is complete and utter crap. Why should the Republicans be forced to fix it. It must be repealed. The Feds have no business mandating a thing. No replacement.
You must have had a really sh!tty week last week.
Think of how rich Rush will get stirring up everyone who is pissed off over last week.
I am over my rant. (I think) The media is off chasing other issues now. The south shall live again…. Southerners aren’t all bad.
@Wolve
One does not get their way just huffin’ and puffin’ – one needs to propose a good idea. So far the only thing the House has voted on is repealing the ACA. If they were serious about actually accomplishing something, they would vote on a fix. They are not serious.
People take the risk of no insurance because they think we will all pitch in (via medicaid/non payment) when they really need their insurance – we are all just a car accident away from bankruptcy.
No, they did not. They interpreted the entire law in context – as they have in the past. If it were interpreted as Scalia wanted – it would be punishing the States that did not set up an exchange. And no State was informed that that was the intent.
And, if the Repubs come up with a “fix” which THEY find necessary, will you libs prevail upon this POTUS to sign it or are you just playing your usual deceptive political games? Libs have a history of playing underhanded and lying, as you well know.
Got a couple of gun toting non NRA bona fide (meet the criteria) Virginia GENTLEMEN in my house. Solid convictions and polite, kind and respectful of others. All others. That’s how I define Southern. And we have a battle flag and a few other items.
I have introduced them to Boston, Quohogs, Hockey, Dels Lemonade and chorizo
@Pat.Herve
Spare me the kool-aid, Pat. You know damned well that no Repub “fix” would pass this lame POTUS. The option for the Repubs is to keep their “fix” powder dry until we see the outcome of November 2016.
Too bad liberals have never figured out how to help people who need help without messing up those who don’t need government intervention. LBJ’s misadvised “War on Poverty” over and over and over again.