Click here for DaTechGuyBlog.com Same Fedoras, Same Cannoli different domain.
Please Help DaTechGuy pay Da Bills
Click for the latest show
Maxine’s in an online friend of mine and used to be one of the Liberal voices on DaTechGuy on DaRadio Panel. She’s a nice lady with a great family.
Every now and then however she illustrates the difference between left and right perfectly like in this exchange about impeachment
Peter, I promise you that the day after the election when the dem president wins & we take both houses of congress. I’ll taunt you & I’ll enjoy it 💃🏿
— Maxine Baptiste (@brownsugar7878) September 28, 2019
Horace Tabor: Wait a minute! You can’t buy a woman for money.
Paint your Wagon 1969
Mad Jack Duncan: You just try and get one without it.
I must admit when I saw this headline at hotair
being a comic at heart my first thought was: “Hell every long married man knows that.”
But when I read the actual piece at Hotair
CBS is conflating two different issues. It was not all that long ago that the societal norm was to postpone sexual activity for marriage, even if the norm was not universally observed at all times. We didn’t fret about too little premarital sex and too much virginity back in those days, and yet that norm produced significant fertility booms, most recently and famously after World War II. Oddly, the later expectation of early and constant sexual activity regardless of marital status, combined with the contraceptive culture that enables it, has produced fertility shortages.
It’s the fertility crisis that’s the issue, not the lack of sexual activity. So what’s causing the fertility crisis? CBS focuses on a lack of job prospects and economic growth in both Japan and other industrialized nations, but the quality of life in these countries is better than ever. We have more access to luxuries and information than any other generation that preceded us. We live in larger spaces than ever. Rather than delay gratification to produce families, we tell ourselves — as one Japanese man does in the above video — that he doesn’t earn enough money to support a wife and family. That’s a choice, not an economic imperative.
…that I realized that the entire problem was about math.
I’m a big fan of math, I love how math is inherently truthful, the equation either adds up or it doesn’t.
So let me put things in a simple mathematical context. Except in cases where people are actually swept away in emotion which despite what people see in TV, movies or romance novels is not how life generally works there are two basic formulas for marriage:
(MP ≥ WP) = MM
A formula where
If a woman decides that a man’s prospects for success are greater than hers that man instantly becomes marriage material because he has the potential to improve that woman’s comfort level and provide for any children they potentially can have together. If a man’s prospects are at least equal to hers than that man is considered at least an acceptable as marriage material because combined said comfort level is at least not going to diminish and with their combined potential might even improve
This is the most common formula for marriage, there is however a 2nd one that covers a specific situation
(MW + MP + MS) ≥ EL = MM
Where
You’ll note that a woman’s wealth doesn’t factor into the equation because a a man is immediately acceptable to most women as a prospect if a guarantee of an easy life comes with him, but this formula covers women whose prospects exceed the norm and especially those who exceed the norm by a high amount and thus are assured of comfort already. As a rule such a woman wants to marry a man who has at least enough wealth and prospects to make an easy life for himself without her (Think Giselle and Tom Brady) but now with comfort already assured Social standing becomes a factor, in some cases a huge factor. Does such a man have a social standing high enough to overcome lack of other prospects or even wealth? Does he come from a famous family? Was he once a sports hero, a famous pol or have some other standing that would enhance a woman’s social standing? If he does then he’s marriage material.
That’s the bottom line math of marriage when it comes to finding a mate for women and that’s why when you have a culture that systematically goes after men’s prospects and potential you end up with a culture where marriage and fertility are gone. This was sold as a panacea to women as a solution to all their problems, but all it did was create a world where the number of men who satisfy the formula that women want for marriage is shrinking away.
May women be happy with the culture they’ve created.
When I saw this piece at Hotair about folks being Shocked SHOCKED at an increase in theft once it was decriminalized in California all I could think of is this. This is basically what people are doing with the attempts to redefine what sin is, with the full knowledge that it will cause an increase in it. This is a feature not a bug to these folks in charge.
I don’t understand why people seem so Shocked SHOCKED that the Democrats seem to be redefining impeachable offenses and to a large degree even truth. After redefining what “marriage” and “man” and “woman” is why would anyone be surprised that they will redefine truth on the fly when it suits them?
Was at Mass today (actually two) , I was still stewing concerning something at work that has really angered me when I went and viola, the sermon (at the 1st mass) talked about approaching prayer in general and in particular God with the wrong expectations. After all these years you would think I wouldn’t be Shocked SHOCKED at getting exactly what I needed from a short sermon at a daily mass but the surprise still comes.
On a pair of sports shows there were folks Shocked SHOCKED that Tom Brady being ranked as the #1 QB in the league at this point with Pat Mahomes at 6. While I agree that at 6 Mahomes is too low I think I’d be more Shocked SHOCKED if the defending champion superbowl QB who has outscored opponents 106 to 17 and is doing it at the age of 42 wasn’t ranked #1 in the league at this point.
Finally I was surfing sports radio yesterday as I drove home and the only game on was the New England Revolution vs Portland Timbers. It was 1-0 as I drove home and when Portland scored again in the 81 minutes. As this is soccer you figure it’s over but not only does the Revolution score in the 87th minute but in the 96th minute after a desperate throw in and kick into the box a video review showed that a Rev Player was pulled down in the box for a penalty kick which would tie the game.
I’m not a soccer guy but I confess that I stayed in the car for the end and was Shocked SHOCKED that they tied that game after being down 2-0 in the 86 min. If I was the revolution I’d be using this to push the game locally.
Right now there is has been a sudden pivot toward impeachment in the house.
The media and the left have gone all in on it as they have every single time and like every other time not only is there no “there” there but even if they thought this Ukraine stuff had legs there is no time for a full investigation before the election.
That being the case, why are they even considering going all in on this, the answer is simple:
The know they are toast in Election 2020.
With the economy going strong, the president’s popularity soaring and trust in the complicit media at an all time low they understand that their chances of winning next November were slim to begin with and with the clown show of candidates all dying to give free healthcare to illegal aliens and tax the hell out of businesses Slim just left town.
An impeachment inquiry is a roll of the dice, a last desperate chance to energize and placate the base while holding back a vote that will doom them in the house.
The whole “impeachment inquiry” will be all about her getting the time to make that calculation and if she decides that a vote will cost her the congress she can declare that there is simply not enough evidence to move forward or that it’s too close to the election for the vote
If it actually comes to a vote expect it to be close, you can be sure that Pelosi will calculate that Democrats who are in most danger of an AOC inspired challenger will vote “yes’ while those in most danger of losing a seat due in a swing district if they support impeachment will vote “no”.
Nancy Pelosi understands that it’s a long chance, but like General Lee who was in command the last time Democrats tried to overthrow the government she also understands that she can’t win without long chances. So here we are.
But do not doubt for a minute that if these jokers thought they could win in 2020, they would sit back and let events take it’s course. This is as desperate a roll of the dice as Picket’s Charge and will likely have the same amount of success:
Final thought, ironically also like Picket’s charge the idiots who lead this suicidal political move will be celebrated by Democrats for generations.
